“Even if Longhorn ships in mid-2006, it will be mid-2007 before we see it in real quantity, late-2008 before it has a significant installed base, and perhaps 2011 before XP finally fades away. That’s if Microsoft hits its marks from here on and customers actually want what Longhorn manages to deliver. Now factor in time for WinFS and the confusion when XP starts getting some Longhorn features, and it looks like the fun just won’t be stopping,” David Coursey writes for eWeek.
“Longhorn’s woes may open a door for Linux, a very tiny door, but Linux just isn’t a good choice for desktops. Instead, desktop Linux proponents should wake up and switch to the Mac OS,” Coursey writes. “People who use Mac OS X and think about such things consider it to be ‘Linux done right.’ Of course, it’s Unix, not Linux, but that’s a minor point. As Linux fragments, as it must, the distinction will become even more academic that it is already.”
Coursey writes, “Mac OS X has a better user interface than Windows, better security and is more stable. It’s all the operating system most users need. It doesn’t have the application support Windows enjoys, but there are many more excellent commercial OS X apps than there are Linux apps. If the desktop Linux people really cared about using a great operating system, they would stop trying to reinvent the wheel and rally around Mac OS X. It would be great if the contest were between two worthy operating systems, like Mac and XP/Longhorn. But Linux vs. Longhorn? You’ve got to be kidding.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Mac OS X vs. Windows XP is not much of a contest today, as users of both understand. Mac OS X vs. ‘Longhorn’ is not a contest at all since Mac OS X is the only contender that actually exists, it wins by default. Even if the stripped-down, feature-shedding ‘Shorthorn’ debuted today, Mac OS X ‘Panther’ would wipe the floor with it. Microsoft has always followed Apple’s Mac with their me-too Windows OS and they’re falling behind more and more with their never-ending Longhorn fiasco. It is time for our Linux cousins to join forces with us and adopt quality hardware complete with advanced 64-bit G5s and Mac OS X. Mac OS X is everything (except totally free) that Linux wants to be, but will never achieve. With Mac OS X powered by passionate Mac users and former Linux users, Microsoft would feel some serious pressure. You have to wonder if the bloated Microsoft behemoth would even be able to make a timely and coherent move to defend its ill-gotten, monopoly-abused Windows turf.
moo…
Go Mac Go.
I couldn’t agree more. But in my opinion, those that aren’t using OS X are just simply missing out and that really is their loss, not mine.
If I recall, the linux distros that the average user would get aren’t free either, are they? I know Red Hat Linux comes at a cost and I’d guess plenty of others do to. I’m not into linux at all, so I’m only guessing.
get mac os x to run on Joe Blow’s custom-built beige box and I think apple could grab a chunk of the linux crowd. You can’t promote the use of an “open source” kernel when the graphical interface forces you into a proprietary hardware setup.
All the Apple dealerships here can’t get enough product to supply Mac users let alone Linux users too. They’ve even sold the display G5s in the closest dealership to me, and the only Macs in the shop are laptops.
I can understand the G5 delays, but why are there no eMacs either?
There are no eMacs left because there haven’t been any iMacs for months, so people in the market for Mac consumer desktops have felt the crunch.
Whilst in MS bashing mode check out this detailed review of XP SP2’s security enhancements.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/02/winxpsp2_security_review/
so why aren’t hoardes of people switching to the Mac? I’ll tell you why. two things:
1) Apple doesn’t offer a cheaper “headless” Mac that would compete with the Dells of the world (yes, some people can’t afford an eMac)
2) Games, or lack thereof…
one of these things Apple can fix – today.
Gandalf: it is few threads below in MDN already
Linux isn’t totally free. Saying that is like only considering the initial hardware cost between an intel PC and a Mac PC.
Linux… yuk! Been there, done that. Linux in any flavor needs more attention than my last girlfriend.
Of course, Linux is a lot more stable than two girlfriends ago – she was like Windows: always on her period, never stable and apt to go berserko anytime at all with no warning.
Yup…. I’ll stick with Mac OSx and my NEW girlfriend… they both work, they’re always happy to see me and they remain happy to be turned on every day.
>You can’t promote the use of an “open source” kernel when the graphical interface forces you into a proprietary hardware setup.
——-
What is “a proprietary hardware setup” ? AFAIK open source hardware doesn’t exist. Or maybe you were referring to building your own pc from available parts? surely you’re not suggesting that non geeks build their own boxen ?
As far as I’m concerned M$ is the enemy NOT Linux, I think that OS X and Linux compliment each other very well in their respective niches, but IMHO desktop computing isn’t a Linux niche YET !
I happen to believe that in the not too distant future, Linux will be the mainstream platform and windoze will wither and die. I also believe that this is good for the mac platform. There will always be a need for the Macintosh experience and enough people willing to pay a premium to get it.
As much as I love my Macs, they will never be the mainstream platform.
So I say – go Linux AND go Apple
Define hoardes. Million users more? What do you have in mind?
Windows base is essentially corporate users. No hordes there: very conservative and lots of drag. Hey, they for the most have still to adopt XP and you want them to move to OS X in few months? Get real.
Gamers: they are no computer users. IF a gamer has tens of titles also there they still are with older version of Windows for fear of breaking their gaming experience and you want hordes of switchers from there? Will not happen even if OS X had exactly the same titles available: what’s the point of changing machine and OS to get the same, that is, your favorite game working as before. So, cross them out.
Who remains? Home users and professionals in education and in fields where they have decisional power toward what platform to use.
Home users: for the most, judging from the one I know, they do not distinguish between Windows and Office. For the most they are surprised when they hear Office run on the Mac as well. It is something out of their understanding: “But… it is not Windows, how could that be possible”.
Professional, especially in educational and research fields. Oh my, let me tell you. Every one and their dogs are buying Powerbooks. You want hordes? What about seeing Windows platform be now the minority at workshops and meetings?
Yes, hordes buying OS X platforms are very real.
To get Linux users–and MANY others–Apple would need to release a low- to mid-range G5 tower (headless, with adequate expansion capability). It is unbelievably STUPID and SHORTSIGHTED that Apple refuses to do this.
And I LOVE Apple.
🙁
Most of Linux users are in institutions were discounted prices apply:
Dual G5 PowerMacs go from ~$1800 to ~$2700. Other discounts do apply. Apple is making a dent here.
Powerbooks? from ~$1400 to ~$2500. Prices are very much similar or better than other brands.
Once you get in there, you start to cripple in other segments. And Apple is getting in there, let me tell you.
“Professional, especially in educational and research fields. Oh my, let me tell you. Every one and their dogs are buying Powerbooks. You want hordes? What about seeing Windows platform be now the minority at workshops and meetings?”
Seahawk, I couldn’t agree more. These days, Windows users at scientific meetings have the body language of smokers: they know they should kick the bad habit, and they’re ashamed they haven’t done it yet.
As I said in other threads already: Apple is – in many cases – cheaper than other brands. They are aggressively discounting all models. In some cases even tax-free sales are possible which reduces the prices even more.
Amazing! David Coursey used to be a Winblows apologist before his Mac experiment. He bought an iMac G4 and the rest is history…
I don’t understand the constant call for a cheap, headless Mac. If you want a headless Mac, get an Xserve, If you want a cheap Mac, get an eMac.
It ain’t gonna happen folks and before someone brings up the other fantasy – OS X on intel/AMD that ain’t happening either.
hagar: totally. They even come forward and announce their next laptop will be a Powerbook for sure. Looks like sessions at the local AA gathering.
1) Apple doesn’t offer a cheaper “headless” Mac that would compete with the Dells of the world (yes, some people can’t afford an eMac)
Enough already with the “headless” Mac Crap. Here we have a a new iMac that, for all intents and purposes, is BODYLESS! And fer cripes sake, people who can spend $599 on a dell (before rebates) can sure as hell save up an extra $200 for an eMac. It can be done, has been done, and if they want quality for their money, SHOULD be done.
2) Games, or lack thereof…
There aren’t as many games as there are on the PC, but when it comes to the top rates games, 95% of them wind up on the Mac eventually. Usually within 3-6 months of their initial release. Besides, the Crappy games that come out for PC would never last long in the Mac market. Quality not quantity makes the biggest difference here. I will admit, there should be more developement of first run games for the Mac. I personally would never benefit from this as I just don’t play games anymore like I used to. I’m too busy working in iMovie, or Garageband to care.
so what IS the difference between Linux & Unix?
I believe there is a good reason to have a headless mac. The people that are going to spend $599 on a Dell really dont care too much about computers. The want something that they can surf aol (otherwise known as the internet) or type a document. Because of this lack of interest, it also means they have a lack of knowledge about why windows sucks and why mac’s are better. So what they see is a price point, this one costs $599 and that one costs $799, so why should i pay $200 dollars more? And as for the bodyless imac, what do they care when they could get 2 dells for the price of one imac. Dont get me wrong, I love apple and what they do and I own 3 macs and I want to buy more. I just want to see apple grow and the way to do it infultrate families (which they have been trying to do via iLife) but most average families run on a budget and if apple can get past this budget issue then we can see mass families that grow up using a mac.
My 2 cents…