Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 12th Mar 2006 18:40 UTC, submitted by Varg Vikernes
Apple Dan Kusnetzky, Apple program vice president, spoke to PC Pro News at IDC and said that Apple has no plans to support booting into Vista on the new Intel Macs. However, a Microsoft spokesman said that Microsoft would have no problem granting a Windows licence to Apple, in exactly the same way it currently provides licences to Dell and HP: "Microsoft would support Apple the same way it supports every other PC manufacturer." But Dan Kusnetzky said it would be difficult to know who would support that machine if Windows was running on a Mac. However, "no doubt someone will work out how to run Windows on the Mac, even if Apple doesn't technically support that."
Thread beginning with comment 103776
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
stephanem
Member since:
2006-01-11

> Let me repost it again, or at least the point of it:)
> Monolithic kernel and lack of stable ABI in kernel is > double edged sword.
>
> Good sides:
> 1. not bounded to specifics forewer

So that's another way of saying, I don't know jack about designing operating systems but lets see what I can hack up this week.

> 2. larger gains possible because devs are not bound
> to ancient history

Imagine how this would play out at MS/Apple/Oracle/IBM/Sun?. You release a patch of your system that toally breaks everyhthing that came before.

> 3. monolithic is faster

OK no arguments here.

> Bad sides:
> 1. companies don't like the moving ground
> 2. see 1.
> 3. for each change in main branch, complete kernel
> has to be recompiled

Why just companies. Users don't like moving ground. One day Nvidia works and the next day it doesn't. I can assure you that through all the SP1s and SP2s and Patch Tuesdays of Windows XP, I've never had to reinstall my Nvidia driver.

> From a user perspective:
> 1. there are repositories
> 2. usualy those repositories follow both, drivers and > kernel modifications
> 3. when you update kernel you usualy update driver
> too. So there is no more recompiling for users
> anymore.

Except these user repositories don't cover all kernel drivers and modules - how about ones from VMWare or Win4Lin or OSS? These people are so religious that they say you want us to maintain proprietary modules - tell the companies to open source them and they jolly well know that the proprietary guys will not.

Edited 2006-03-12 22:01

Reply Parent Score: 3

somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

ok let see what you hacked up:)

Imagine how this would play out at MS/Apple/Oracle/IBM/Sun?. You release a patch of your system that toally breaks everyhthing that came before.

I already said it is bad for company haven't I???? Zero points, can't count repeating my words as your knowledge:)

btw. Look how RHEL updates kernel for its distro. Oracle won't stop working unless you start using your own vanilla compiled and patched kernel.

Why just companies. Users don't like moving ground. One day Nvidia works and the next day it doesn't

If users installed driver from repo. kernel won't update until dependancies for all packages will be satisfied:) Meaning until driver is repo, no kernel update for you. But after update, everything still works:) Zero points.

Except these user repositories don't cover all kernel drivers and modules - how about ones from VMWare or Win4Lin or OSS? These people are so religious that they say you want us to maintain proprietary modules - tell the companies to open source them and they jolly well know that the proprietary guys will not.

Yep, I forgot to mention VMWare, but it is part of the bad for commercial I specified. One half of the point. There's still no repo that would support VMWare updating modules. Again, if you go trough my history, you'll see VMWare was one of the general points of flamewar:)


Soooo, 0.5/3. How did you fare in your opinion?

p.s. I should probably take off 1 point for completely missing the debate you started in the first sentence. "I don't know jack about designing operating systems but lets see what I can hack up this week."
Well, this week you talked about the affects of non stable ABI on proprietary world (and this is just one of zillion point in designing operating systems, a drop of water in the sea). And not even a word about "designing operating systems". Ok, lets say you had a bad week without stripping you one point:)

Now my question:) Answer would be appreciated

Why do I get the feeling that you're trying to fight a holy war without a willing adversary? ;) Or at least, I won't fight, I'm just amused by your comments ;)

I'm no zealot, I'm not saying everything has to be opensourced (hell, I don't do that for all of my software). I'm not saying Linux is better than Windows or OSX (and whenever I did I always specified personal opinion and I really do that always), mostly I'm agnostic because my job forces me to think crossplatform, but for my misfortune I'm always ready to answer to everybody. All of Windows 2k3 and all Vista betas have more or less just discouraged me to use them on a larger scale, I use 2k3 only when needs say "no different solution", and Vista I'll probably avoid as long as possible.

While you on the other hand (or translated into human language), were specifiying Vista is the next gods gift for humanity, and Win3k sweeps the floor with Linux. Both are only biased, untruthfull and over zealoted remarks.

I can assure you that through all the SP1s and SP2s and Patch Tuesdays of Windows XP, I've never had to reinstall my Nvidia driver.

Lucky you then. Countless people had problems wih network and mouse drivers when updating on SP2. (search on google) Just as many apps stoped working (ms even provided 2 page list of them). The only app I use on Windows stoped working on SP2 update. Talk about this funny fact:)

Edited 2006-03-12 22:39

Reply Parent Score: 0