Steven Buehler wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2005, at 10:45 AM, perthie wrote:
>
>> I agree, and this fact is giving the whole industry a mixed message.
>> Everyone cant wait to see Microsoft go to hell, but no one wants to
>> offer a suitable replacement (or maybe no one _can_ offer a suitable
>> replacement without re-creating the same problems)
>
>
> The one company that *has* offerred a usable alternative, but has yet
> to truly capitalize on it, is Apple, with Mac OS X. However, Steve
> Jobs killed the whole idea of licensing the system on "clone"
> equipment (like IBM did) when he reassumed the Apple throne, and
> unless you come in at the VERY low end (i.e, Mac Mini or iBook G4),
> the cost of entry is high. But then, when you own the equipment AND
> the OS, there's an advantage.
You don't have to clone the hardware. It's a FreeBSD core, and you can
simply recompile. (anyone here running Darwin for X86?) It's simply a
matter of porting it to the architecture.
As for the "owning the OS" -- hardly. Sure, you own the kernel -- it's
FreeBSD. But if you're meaning the components of the usable OS (Quartz
and Aqua, for example), you're as out of luck as with Windows.
Gnorb
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:11:20 EDT