7 Jun
2005
7 Jun
'05
10:54 a.m.
Yes, indeed IBM is a substantial company. But I'm not buying an IBM PC with
Linux installed -- I have an installed base of Windows PCs at home. I
wouldn't be buying it because I like Intel or the X86 architecture over the
PPC architecture. I'm buying it because I'm tired of Windows.
I, like lots of others, get my Linux distributions through downloads from
Fedora, Mandrake, etc. yes, they're easier to install and configure than
before, but there's something about the slickness of OSX and the support of
Apple that would make me switch.
I think I would be just as comfortable if I could purchase Linux from IBM
for a single desktop without having to buy it preinstalled on IBM hardware.
Apple's product is more polished and has lots of well-integrated featured
that everyone in my family could love.
Maybe I'm uninformed, which is possible because I don't follow Linux too
closely.
However, this is all academic if they don't make a PC-compatible version
(which as previously noted != X86 version ).
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Paul Koning
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 10:31 AM
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: RE: Apple Goes Intel...
>>>> "Richard" == Richard Cini
<Cini> writes:
Richard> I've dabbled with Linux but I would feel better if there was
Richard> a substantial company behind it. ...
Um, last I looked IBM was a pretty substantial company.
paul
7 Jun
7 Jun
12:56 p.m.
From: "Cini, Richard" <Richard.Cini at wachovia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 9:54 AM
Yes, indeed IBM is a substantial company. But I'm
not buying an IBM PC
with
Linux installed -- I have an installed base of Windows PCs at home. I
wouldn't be buying it because I like Intel or the X86 architecture over
the
PPC architecture. I'm buying it because I'm tired of Windows.
I, like lots of others, get my Linux distributions through downloads from
Fedora, Mandrake, etc. yes, they're easier to install and configure than
before, but there's something about the slickness of OSX and the support
of
Apple that would make me switch.
I think I would be just as comfortable if I could purchase Linux from IBM
for a single desktop without having to buy it preinstalled on IBM
hardware.
Apple's product is more polished and has lots of well-integrated featured
that everyone in my family could love.
Maybe I'm uninformed, which is possible because I don't follow Linux too
closely.
However, this is all academic if they don't make a PC-compatible version
(which as previously noted != X86 version ).
Rich
<snip>
I agree that more competition for Micro$loth is good.
The biggest problem is that Apple has been kept alive by several factors two
of which are: $ from Willy boy and the simple fact they are not just
another PC running Windoze.
If they become just another PC will they lose a marketing base and how big a
base could they lose?
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
2:01 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy McLaughlin" <cctalk at randy482.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: Apple Goes Intel...
two
From: "Cini, Richard" <Richard.Cini at
wachovia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 9:54 AM
> Yes, indeed IBM is a substantial company. But I'm not buying an IBM PC
> with
> Linux installed -- I have an installed base of Windows PCs at home. I
> wouldn't be buying it because I like Intel or the X86 architecture over
> the
> PPC architecture. I'm buying it because I'm tired of Windows.
>
> I, like lots of others, get my Linux distributions through downloads
from
> Fedora, Mandrake, etc. yes, they're easier to
install and configure than
> before, but there's something about the slickness of OSX and the support
> of
> Apple that would make me switch.
>
> I think I would be just as comfortable if I could purchase Linux from
IBM
> for a single desktop without having to buy it
preinstalled on IBM
> hardware.
> Apple's product is more polished and has lots of well-integrated
featured
that everyone
in my family could love.
Maybe I'm uninformed, which is possible because I don't follow Linux too
closely.
However, this is all academic if they don't make a PC-compatible version
(which as previously noted != X86 version ).
Rich
<snip>
I agree that more competition for Micro$loth is good.
The biggest problem is that Apple has been kept alive by several factors of which are: $ from Willy boy and the simple fact
they are not just
another PC running Windoze.
If they become just another PC will they lose a marketing base and how big
a
base could they lose?
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
The only change a user would see when upgrading his G5 to an x86 Powermac in
a few years is a speed increase, nothing more. People used to buy Macs in
the 68k era because they were the best desktop you can buy (multiple
monitors, PnP that worked, high memory ceiling, SCSI, etc) and the GUI was
decent. During the early PPC era the machines only had the processor going
for them (very decent FPU) picking up standard x86 features (PCI, USB, IDE,
etc). Today the only thing going for Apple is OSX (tightly written to the
hardware), and that is not going to change. People who don't like piecing
their machines together and going through driver hell will stick to the Mac
no matter what was under the hood. Lately a Mac is for people who hate
Microsoft and don't like messing with Linux installs.
2:29 p.m.
From: "Teo Zenios" <teoz at neo.rr.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 1:01 PM
The point is once you have another X86 computer you will see pressure to use
the same software and pressure to use the same hardware. A huge portion of
the user base will want everything right now for no $.
This pressure that can be expected may lead (probably will lead) to a
homogenous PC environment.
Even if Apple tries to tie their software to their hardware how long will it
be before someone starts selling an emulated system on other systems. From
there will Apple watch people go that route or will they decide to directly
compete. By being able to take a cheap PC clone and running Apple software
or emulated software on it that will put even more pressure to bring down
the cost of Apple hardware. With cheaper hardware and software what
financial problems can that create for Apple?
How long will Willy boy wait to sell XP on the new MAC's, if not Willy then
someone will.
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
From: "Randy McLaughlin" <cctalk at
randy482.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:56 PM
<snip>
I agree that more competition for Micro$loth is good.
The biggest problem is that Apple has been kept alive by several factors
two
of which are: $ from Willy boy and the simple
fact they are not just
another PC running Windoze.
If they become just another PC will they lose a marketing base and how
big
a
base could they lose?
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
The only change a user would see when upgrading his G5 to an x86 Powermac
in
a few years is a speed increase, nothing more. People used to buy Macs in
the 68k era because they were the best desktop you can buy (multiple
monitors, PnP that worked, high memory ceiling, SCSI, etc) and the GUI
was
decent. During the early PPC era the machines only had the processor going
for them (very decent FPU) picking up standard x86 features (PCI, USB,
IDE,
etc). Today the only thing going for Apple is OSX (tightly written to the
hardware), and that is not going to change. People who don't like piecing
their machines together and going through driver hell will stick to the
Mac
no matter what was under the hood. Lately a Mac is for people who hate
Microsoft and don't like messing with Linux installs. 
2:46 p.m.
On 6/7/05, Randy McLaughlin <cctalk at randy482.com> wrote:
From: "Teo Zenios" <teoz at
neo.rr.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 1:01 PM
The point is once you have another X86 computer you will see pressure to use
the same software and pressure to use the same hardware. A huge portion of
the user base will want everything right now for no $.
This pressure that can be expected may lead (probably will lead) to a
homogenous PC environment.
Even if Apple tries to tie their software to their hardware how long will it
be before someone starts selling an emulated system on other systems. From
there will Apple watch people go that route or will they decide to directly
compete. By being able to take a cheap PC clone and running Apple software
or emulated software on it that will put even more pressure to bring down
the cost of Apple hardware. With cheaper hardware and software what
financial problems can that create for Apple?
Apple only needs to make Intel Mac that can run Windows, linux, and
OS/X, and to make sure that other's PC can not run OS/X. This is not
difficuilt, with the help from lawyers and an embedded Apple ID. Then
many people might be willing to pay $100 more to buy a MAC that can
run everything, other than to buy a Dell that can not run OS/X. Apple
will gain a lot of PC market share from Dell.
From: "Randy McLaughlin" <cctalk at
randy482.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:56 PM
<snip>
I agree that more competition for Micro$loth is good.
The biggest problem is that Apple has been kept alive by several factors
two
of which are: $ from Willy boy and the simple
fact they are not just
another PC running Windoze.
If they become just another PC will they lose a marketing base and how
big
a
base could they lose?
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
The only change a user would see when upgrading his G5 to an x86 Powermac
in
a few years is a speed increase, nothing more. People used to buy Macs in
the 68k era because they were the best desktop you can buy (multiple
monitors, PnP that worked, high memory ceiling, SCSI, etc) and the GUI
was
decent. During the early PPC era the machines only had the processor going
for them (very decent FPU) picking up standard x86 features (PCI, USB,
IDE,
etc). Today the only thing going for Apple is OSX (tightly written to the
hardware), and that is not going to change. People who don't like piecing
their machines together and going through driver hell will stick to the
Mac
no matter what was under the hood. Lately a Mac is for people who hate
Microsoft and don't like messing with Linux installs.
How long will Willy boy wait to sell XP on the new MAC's, if not Willy then
someone will.
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
3:23 p.m.
From: "9000 VAX" <vax9000 at gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 1:46 PM
<snip>
Apple only needs to make Intel Mac that can run
Windows, linux, and
OS/X, and to make sure that other's PC can not run OS/X. This is not
difficuilt, with the help from lawyers and an embedded Apple ID. Then
many people might be willing to pay $100 more to buy a MAC that can
run everything, other than to buy a Dell that can not run OS/X. Apple
will gain a lot of PC market share from Dell.
<snip>
I don't believe that Apple will start with the ability to run XP. To start
with the ability to run XP opens up a can of worms trying to give support in
too many directions.
I don't believe that any lawyer can prevent someone from writing an OS/X
emulator (or whatever OS the new MAC uses).
I don't believe that Apple can survive trying to compete with every PC clone
out there.
In the long run Apple will directly run Win apps (through wine or through
direct sells of XP). In the long run MAC apps will run on cheap PC clones.
If Micro$loth and or Apple try to stop it I can foresee many lawsuits.
I am not sure is this is a good thing or not (probably both in ways we don't
know).
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
6:43 p.m.
On Tuesday 07 June 2005 13:01, Teo Zenios wrote:
Today the only thing going for Apple is OSX (tightly
written to the
hardware), and that is not going to change. People who don't like
piecing their machines together and going through driver hell will
stick to the Mac no matter what was under the hood. Lately a Mac is
for people who hate Microsoft and don't like messing with Linux
installs.
I disagree:
finnegpt at excalibur:~$ uname -snrmo ; grep machine /proc/cpuinfo
Linux excalibur 2.6.11.7 ppc64 GNU/Linux
machine : PowerMac7,3
I'm not necessarily a "typical" apple customer, but definitely not the
only one that likes to run Linux on their hardware. If you don't
believe me, look here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/
Oh, and there's some "Linus Torvalds" guy that is said to have a G5 as
his main workstation; I'm pretty sure it doesn't run MacOS.
IMO MacOS is ok (though I have taken to being an Free/OSS software
snob), but the only reason I buy Apple is for their hardware. Linux +
Power(PC) == goodness.
Also, I know plenty of people that either use both Linux and MacOS.
Pat
--
Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
8:24 p.m.
Also, I know plenty of people that either use both
Linux and MacOS.
Or NetBSD. Besides my two OS X systems, I have a IIci and Q605 running
NetBSD/mac68k, and a 7300+G3/500 running NetBSD/macppc.
--
---------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Floodgap Systems Ltd * So. Calif., USA * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Microsoft Windows is the IBM 3270 of the 21st century. ---------------------
8 Jun
8 Jun
3:56 a.m.
Hi,
Patrick Finnegan said:
On Tuesday 07 June 2005 13:01, Teo Zenios wrote:
I disagree too...I run Yellow Dog Linux on a dual 180MHz PPC 7300.
(It was originally a 200MHz machine, but the previous owner liked
swapping bits around!)
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb at dial.pipex.com
The future was never like this!
Today the only thing going for Apple is OSX
(tightly written to the
hardware), and that is not going to change. People who don't like
piecing their machines together and going through driver hell will
stick to the Mac no matter what was under the hood. Lately a Mac is
for people who hate Microsoft and don't like messing with Linux
installs.
I disagree:
finnegpt at excalibur:~$ uname -snrmo ; grep machine /proc/cpuinfo
Linux excalibur 2.6.11.7 ppc64 GNU/Linux
machine : PowerMac7,3
10:02 a.m.
On Wednesday 08 June 2005 02:56, Stan Barr wrote:
Hi,
Just to clarify, a PowerMac7,3 is also know as a G5; in this case, a
dual 2GHz G5. :)
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCS --- http://www.itap.purdue.edu/rcs/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
finnegpt at excalibur:~$ uname -snrmo ; grep
machine /proc/cpuinfo
Linux excalibur 2.6.11.7 ppc64 GNU/Linux
machine : PowerMac7,3
I disagree too...I run Yellow Dog Linux on a dual 180MHz PPC 7300.
(It was originally a 200MHz machine, but the previous owner liked
swapping bits around!)
7018
days inactive
7019
days old
9 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
cctalk＠randy482.com -
pat＠computer-refuge.org -
Richard.Cini＠wachovia.com -
spectre＠floodgap.com -
stanb＠dial.pipex.com -
teoz＠neo.rr.com -
vax9000＠gmail.com