Mateo

Yep, true.

http://www.fortune.com/fortune/fastf...072719,00.html

Now, Dell is a savvy businessman. Either way he wins. If Jobs take Dell up on the offer, which is unlikely, but you never know, he gets a great OS to add to some mediocre hardware. I have no doubt that OSX loaded Dells would sell like crazy.

And if it doesn't happen, this willingness to look at other options gives him some leverage in the next round of pricing with Microsoft. If Longhorn, OSX, and Mandriva are all ready for the Intel architecture in 2006, well that's going to be an interesting discussion.

Root

It sure would be nice to see more on offer out there than windoze. We've got an awful lot of people out there that think windows is the only OS in existence. Not only are there others, but the main alternatives are better.

Root

__________________

IceCold

Well, until you come up with an alternative that runs the programs that I want to use as smoothly as WindowsXP Pro, then your statement is patently false.

Here's to TacticalOS!

rs_al

I refer to windows as "Half-Life OS", because that's what I use it for. Also it plays music, and occasionally DVDs. For some reason, it doesn't seem like it should take 2.4 GB to do that. but then again, it doesn't always seem like Steam should take up 16GB. But it does.

TheFeniX

"Better" is always a subjective term that you just can't use in a comparison like this.

Is a Ferrari better than a Mac Truck?
For speed? For towing 10,000 pounds?

__________________

Mateo

And if Ferrari designs a truck that can tow 10,000 pounds, and not even break a sweat getting to 180mph, then what?

TheFeniX

I fail to see the point you're making. There's no reason for a Mac truck to need to go 180-mph. That's not what the design is intended for. The gas-mileage and engine size for a vehicle like that would also make it pretty useless for just about anything.

__________________

Mateo

Well, technically, there is little difference between the BSD that underlies OSX, and the FreeBSD that runs major websites.

Slap a pretty gui on it, and its both a ferrari on the desktop, and can do some heavy hauling as required.

The emphasis is on intended use, not underlying design.

TheFeniX

You've taken the analogy too far. I should have explained it better, but it was meant along the lines of "products are designed for a specific purpose" and you can't claim one product is better in all ways because it does a particular job better.

Sorry guys, Linux/Unix isn't the answer to all the questions out there. Neither is Windows for that matter.

__________________