Wednesday, April 27, 2005

How Apple Could Kill Micro$oft

Caught The Buzz Report: Windows is weak: where's the alternative? over at C|NET.com and it discusses how the pending M$ "Longhorn" OS is shedding features and a reason for being.

She suggests that Apple could strike by porting their new Tiger OS over to the Intel platform - something that's quite possible since Tiger is built on UNIX and Apple uses Intel for their server products. So, why isn't the mighty Steve Jobs doing this? Because he's a greedy moron who'd rather have 2% of the market, selling his overpriced and underpowered computers to his Kool-Aid-chugging acolytes, that's why!!!

Read the article and count how many opportunities are being missed. Bashing Micro$oft is always in fashion, but part of why M$ is so dominant is because their competitors are self-defeating dopes! Bill Gates must laugh himself to sleep at night.

Smacked down by Dirk Belligerent at 4:05 PM

3 comments:

chooktah said...

The real reason Apple won't release Tiger ported for Intel is that to do so they would necessarily have to make the OS compatible w/ pretty much every piece of computer hardware/peripheral made in the past 5 years, not just the overpriced and severely limited "selection" offered currently to Mac users.. y'know like Microsoft has been doing w/ relatively great results since it's inception.

4/29/2005 8:45 PM
Dirk Belligerent said...

I don't follow the logic because the interface with the hardware has been handled via add-in drivers forever and a day. If Linux and Windoze can do it, what's stopping Apple?

Or the could make certain hardware configurations mandatory to run "Tiger 4 Intel/AMB x86" like how Microsoft binds Windoze Media Edition to new hardware only - you can't buy it loose.

Actually, when Jobs came back and killed off the Mac clones, that's when it was clear that the totalitarian business model they've been plying of late was going to be the order of the day.

(In a bit of irony, this post was made while Kirsty MacColl's "Angel" was playing on iTunes Party Shuffle.)

4/30/2005 2:14 AM
chooktah said...

the interface with the hardware has been handled via add-in drivers forever and a day.
Compare the number of drivers required to operate the extremely limited number of hardware options for a Mac box to the number required for a Windows box which in theory is designed for any and all hardware made in the last 5 years. We're talkin' maybe 10 to 10,000? Apple's main claim to fame is its reliability (ie, no driver conflicts). Well sure, if you only have to design an OS to run reliably w/ an extremely limited number of drivers (see Solaris) then it better be reliable!
If Linux and Windoze can do it, what's stopping Apple?
Jobs knows attempting the feat would finally expose Mac for what it is.. just another OS w/ all the pros and cons of a Windows box but at 3x the price.

4/30/2005 10:34 AM

Post a Comment