What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.594 Comments
- inactive, on 04/11/2008, -31/+397I'm an Apple fanboy and I wouldn't say Apple is a threat to Microsoft. Microsoft is a threat to itself and it's the have-nots that are going to suffer. People who can't afford even cheap PCs are going to be even more on the wrong side of the digital divide if Microsoft doesn't get their act together and start making an OS that you don't need a super computer to run. There's a large segment of the population that needs that cheap alternative.
Apple doesn't need to appeal to everyone to make money. They have less than 10 percent of the market and they are worth almost half as much as Microsoft. That should tell you something. How cool would Macs be if they had 90 percent of the market? What if you woke up one day and everyone in your neighborhood had a BMW? It would be almost annoying as everyone owning an iPod, so I just want to say to all my fellow Apple lovers: let's stop the obsession with Microsoft and just enjoy our machines. - geekmansworld, on 04/11/2008, -20/+160Umm... since when can you use Spaces to run two operating systems simultaneously? I think the author is confusing Spaces with Parallels or something.
Try doing some research before you write a tech article about how the entire industry is about t change. - lnxfi, on 04/11/2008, -8/+109So, it's a nice day outside today. The birds are chirping, people are smiling, and cleavage has come out to play. Who cares about operating systems. Use what you like and smile at the cleavage. Spring is here.
- rondorondorondo, on 04/11/2008, -5/+101Apparently, the EU is also a threat to Microsoft.
- matthistory, on 04/11/2008, -8/+88So Apple is defeating Windows by making it easy to run on an Apple?
- STKD, on 04/11/2008, -19/+85Thanks for the laugh, Businessweek.
- matriculated, on 04/11/2008, -7/+63How did this get dugg? The article is so full of technical mistakes I couldn't even take the article seriously.
- Kazbaeden, on 04/11/2008, -9/+64I don't know why I have to say this in every post about Vista, but it does not need a super computer to run on.
I have a Shuttle SN95G5 from 2004 with an Athlon 64 3000+ (1.8GHz), 1 gig RAM, and a Geforce 6600GT. It's gotta be worth pocket change today. If my computer can run Vista and yours can't, you've got a serious piece of ***** and owe it to yourself to upgrade. - umbriago, on 04/11/2008, -7/+57Careful. I for one am glad Apple is doing well, but this article is clearly marked opinion, and as such presents opinion as fact. Example: "While Microsoft struggles to bring a kernel-based "Windows 7" to market in 2010..." says who, Gary Morgenthaler? Anybody other than you?
- santaliqueur, on 04/11/2008, -5/+55I would love to just enjoy my Mac, but whenever I say anything about it, I get called a fanboy. Apparently there is no such thing as a normal Mac user.
- etandrib, on 04/11/2008, -12/+59How can you say that it doesn't suck when its 5 year old predecessor is still your preference. Enlighten me.
- geekmansworld, on 04/11/2008, -4/+45Yes, but he implies that Spaces IS Parallels. It's not.
- geekmansworld, on 04/11/2008, -10/+49Look, no matter how you slice it this is what he said:
"With one finger you press "Control" and with the other you press "right arrow." Instantly you switch from a Macintosh operating system (OS) to a Microsoft Windows OS. Then, with another two-finger press, you switch back again. "
"This easy toggling on an Apple computer, enabled by a feature called Spaces, was but an interesting side note to last fall's upgrade of the Mac OS. "
No where is Parallels or VMWare mentioned. He's saying that Spaces lets you run two OSes. It's DOESN'T. It's a window-manager. The article is misleading and poorly written. - happytedium, on 04/11/2008, -9/+40Wow, terrible article. Like someone mentioned, Spaces has nothing to do with running Windows. You could do that, with PARALLELS running in one space, and your OS X ***** running in another, but it has nothing to do with spaces. You'd think there'd be some correspondence with someone who knows what the ***** they're doing when you write stuff like this.
- sooner314, on 04/11/2008, -9/+38Gone are the days of unbiased, well-researched and professionally written articles.
- FredFredrickson, on 04/11/2008, -9/+35Unless Apple develops an OS that works on hardware they didn't manufacture, and which runs on existing PC hardware, it will never, ever be a threat to Windows. Period.
- atbnet, on 04/11/2008, -1/+27Unless you pirate Windows, I don't see how running Windows on a Mac is a threat to Microsoft. It may be a threat to Dell, HP, etc. but not to Microsoft.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 04/11/2008, -5/+30I don't know about the 6600GT mentioned above, but you can't expect the hardware industry to suddenly stop moving forward just because Vista got released.
It's the same thing that happened when XP got released and people had to upgrade from WIndows98. There was a group of people then that said 98 was faster.
What I don't like is the double standard here, where Apple can just drop support for old hardware and software at will but Microsoft is expected to maintain compatibility with DOS and Windows 3.11 era programs and the like.
(I'm playing ski free right now)
The specs on these computers that aren't able to run Vista also aren't that good at running OSX or Linux. WAIT WAIT...
I mean specifically when you fire up professional photo or video software or play a video game made this year.
Some heavy stuff you could expect the average person to be doing.
All the major operating systems are progressing. Each time they need better specs, they get smarter, they do more, etc. - saminator, on 04/11/2008, -9/+34You have parallels running and you place it in a space. When you are working in OSX you just control arrow your way over to windows. (or linux for that matter). I like running xp, osx and ubuntu on my macbook pro, its pretty convenient.
- aimhelix, on 04/11/2008, -4/+28Sigh. This is gonna get milked to death.
- wukillabee, on 04/11/2008, -9/+32link or it didnt happen
- texasthor, on 04/11/2008, -4/+27So you're saying 90% of the market uses proprietary and obscure software? I think 85% uses Microsoft office and checks their email. It wouldn't be proprietary if the software companies thought that 90% of the computer world used it. Everything that is used by the main stream market is available for mac. Because it makes sense for the software companies to develop for the mac when there is enough demand to support the development cost. The exception to the rule is Microsoft refusing to develop certain software due to the fact that they are becoming intimidated by the Mac OS. Windows Media Player, IE, Outlook.
- wellyuk, on 04/11/2008, -3/+26Fantastic comment! One of the best!
- wellyuk, on 04/11/2008, -4/+25Mediocre comment. Won't be reading this one again.
- inactive, on 04/11/2008, -6/+26To rip off an old BSD mailing list:
I don't use OS X because I hate microsoft, I use OS X because I love Unix. - inactive, on 04/11/2008, -8/+26obviously you haven't used a mac.
- saminator, on 04/11/2008, -11/+29I guess when you compare old slow computers yours sound pretty fast considering i can run Leopard on a powerbook from 2002 with 867mhz and it runs really well. I can run final cut, watch movies, photoshop, internet. It runs great i doubt you can find too many store bought pcs out there that can run vista premium from 2002.
- Zzone, on 04/11/2008, -1/+18Funny, I thought sitting in a cubicle punching numbers wasn't work either. So I guess in the end none of us really work.
- jasonhdavis, on 04/11/2008, -4/+21While I don't think the author is an idiot, he does write the statement in a very misleading way. He also gives the impression that MacOS now also comes bundled with Windows and that this will kill corporate Windows. Obviously this isn't the case, and I can't imagine businesses would want to spend 15% more for a Mac, then pay for XP for each Mac.
Overall, the article is poorly researched. - BlackStrain, on 04/11/2008, -2/+19It's also third party software which makes this even more misleading.
- mrsteveman1, on 04/11/2008, -1/+17Whats funny is that the mach kernel itself, as in the main binary, is bigger than the NT kernel binary. Thats not to say everything that runs in the kernel is that small, but the mach kernel itself is actually pretty big on the desktop, around 4mb for each architecture.
- NeoNevermore, on 04/11/2008, -7/+23Come on, a threat to Microsoft? Having Windows running on an Apple Computer is no threat.
You know what would be a REAL threat to Apple? Mac OS X running on any PC. I just wish the Hackintosh projects become more mainstream. - mrsteveman1, on 04/11/2008, -4/+19I don't expect Microsoft to maintain backward compatibility, i wish they would quit doing it actually, its the cause of a lot of problems.
Idiots will always complain, but at some point you have to say, stop using a ***** 10 year old computer, get a new one or keep using 10 year old software on it. That's essentially what apple does when they cut off support for really really old stuff. - burrgrinder, on 04/11/2008, -2/+17OSX 10.x is just as much of a new OS as Windows NT revisions (NT, 2000, XP, Vista). Face it, OS's aren't written from scratch, they evolve.
- DotNetWill, on 04/11/2008, -7/+22"By contrast, Microsoft has held on to an OS tethered to the 1980s, piling additions upon additions with each upgrade to Windows. With last year's arrival of Vista, Windows has swollen to 1 billion bytes (a gigabyte) or more of software code. The "Mach" kernel of the Mac OS X, however, requires less than 1 million bytes (a megabyte) of data in its smallest configuration, expanding modestly with the sophistication of the application."
I'm sorry but WTF?! The author is comparing the /whole/ of windows to the MACH kernel. Or is he implying the windows kernel alone is 1GB? - xtremesniper, on 04/11/2008, -2/+16I don't think you understood the tone of his quote there... He was implying that Apple would not be cool if Macs had 90% of the market.
Then again maybe I'm just missing your point.
Regardless, on the topic of using computers for boring work with proprietary or obscure software... What if you could use a Mac and still do boring work? Oh, right. You already can. The only popular yet obscure software I can think of that wouldn't run on OS X is probably AutoCAD or GIS. That, and the fact that you can still own a Mac but run the "boring" software with Parallels or Boot Camp. You'd still be contributing to the 90% though. - Chunken, on 04/11/2008, -3/+17The author is making up "facts" as he goes. Sounds like a typical Apple fanboy on digg.
- geekmansworld, on 04/11/2008, -5/+19He goes on to suggest that Windows doesn't have a kernel. WTF? Just because one has microkernel and the other a "hybrid" doesn't mean that only the microkernel is a "kernel". What a dumbass.
- xtremesniper, on 04/11/2008, -6/+19Pretty much. Think of it as kind of a Trojan Horse. It gets people to buy a Mac because they figure "why not? I can still run Windows" and then they use OS X more and more often until they stop using Windows.
- geekmansworld, on 04/11/2008, -2/+15It's the "Windows doesn't have a kernel" section that really bugs me.
- phoomp, on 04/11/2008, -13/+26XP did exactly what was needed. It's interesting that Windows users will stick to an old version as long as it does what's needed, while Mac users will race to get the newest MacOS version before it even hits the shelf (even for the bug fixes). Almost makes one wonder what's so wrong with the MacOS that it's users are eagerly awaiting even the next bug fix.
- Tizlox, on 04/11/2008, -7/+19Whats up with all the false-hope apple stories today?
Buried as inaccurate. - basic0, on 04/11/2008, -4/+16Coles Notes version: Author discovered virtual desktops and virtual machines. Got excited and wrote article without bothering to check if other OSes do the same thing. Omitted the part about using Parallels to do this.
- blorc, on 04/11/2008, -2/+14I work for Apple, and I have to agree with this particular statement. Intentionally misleading or not, it's statements like these that make my job difficult when I have to explain to people that Macs do not, in fact, come with Windows, despite what their brother's cousin read on the internets.
- inactive, on 04/11/2008, -7/+18You know, if they were really happy and comfortable with their operating system choice, do you think they'd be calling you names for yours?
- pintomp3, on 04/11/2008, -0/+11maybe he likes vista, but likes xp more? just because i like wings over ribs doesn't mean ribs suck.
- etx313, on 04/11/2008, -2/+13Standard Spin from a biased article. Complete crap.
- digitalpencil, on 04/11/2008, -0/+11^^ the current version of any OS is always the more stable version.. think about it, the brand-new OS is always going to have more bugs than its predecessor because it's new! The reason so many rush out to get the new OS is because of new features like spaces, quicklook and coverflow.
- KibibyteBrain, on 04/11/2008, -3/+13It is corporations need to worry about:
1) Accountability, especially legal stuff. Courts will throw away records you have as a corporation that don't meet best standards. One of the best examples of this are file creation/modification times not generated by a computer using NTP.
2) Security. Namely trust. You are in a strange situation where the people you can trust least with some information are the same who you need to trust the most with other information. You can look at the recent peek by contractors into candidate passport records for an example of this.
3) Accounting/Audits. Managing the finances of a corporation is a nightmare. Hence why they have a whole department to do so. But unless you can document every little software license or whatever is running on your network, it can be difficult for these people to do their jobs. This includes lots of tax stuff that can cause major headaches.
4) Standards/Certifications. Many corporate processes are merely done to meet ISO or government standards. Groups needing you to meet these for technical reasons just need it. If the navy wants you to calculate something with their exact standard method that uses software that runs on windows, it really doesn't matter if you can take a few hours to develop a Mac or Linux app that does the same thing or better. They need the standard
Etc. -
Show 51 - 100 of 589 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is