|
 |
|
Could OS X on Intel be the death of Microsoft? We might be sceptical, but LXer.com, argues that OS X on Intel represents a bold challenge to Redmond, and says why in some detail. Now, this is coming from a Linux advocate, who clearly despises Mr. Gates and all he stands for. But he also recognizes the 'potential' of Mac OS X. Predictably, it is a clarion call for Jobs to make OS X truly open-source – i.e., not just Darwin. The idea? Port Openoffice to Aqua, bundle it with Intel PCs and sell it. Cheaply. You could still by Macs with OS X and the upmarket hardware would justify the purchase; frankly, not everyone wants a white box $299 PC that they have to build up from the options list. What about OEMs, like Dell and HP? Make them pay dearly for OS X (surely Windows' cheap bundling deals would keep Dell et al away from the pricey Mac OS X, wouldn't it?). You can read the whole article here. Analysis: Nice try, but MS is so embedded in corporate IT structures (yes, our four favorite swear words: M - C - S - E) that it becomes almost impossible to switch. True, WordPerfect and Lotus used to rule, but software standards were much less entrenched back then and Microsoft's Windows OS simply wasn't as dominant. But there's a bigger point here that's somewhat overlooked. Phil Schiller and others have said that Apple won't be stopping people from dual or triple-booting their Intel-based Macs. You pay for the hardware, and only Macs will run OS X; but whatever else you choose to run on that Intel chip, whether it be a flavor of Windows or a Linux distro will be entirely up to you. That's choice. That's freedom. And only Apple will be able to give you that choice.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
