Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 16th Dec 2007 00:02 UTC
In the News Apple and Linux are engaged in battle a battle to win over disgruntled Windows users. But who will win, and what will the consequences be for the loser? The most commonly held belief amongst Apple and Linux fanboys is that both factions are engaged in some kind of a war with Microsoft. The truth is that if you look at the market share figure for Windows, Mac and Linux, both Mac OS and all the Linux distros that have ever been released are dwarfed by Windows.
Thread beginning with comment 291153
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

LOL, it's the story of evolution my friend. You have something against rats? They're our ancestors. MS is the huge, lumbering stupid dinosaur, and Apple and Linux are the smaller, but nimbler rats.

Edited 2007-12-16 01:07

Reply Parent Score: 3

sappyvcv Member since:

Apple is more like a panda.

Reply Parent Score: 2

rockwell Member since:

//LOL, it's the story of evolution my friend. You have something against rats? They're our ancestors. //

Interesting. I believe it's the *theory* of evolution. Also, why has the so-called evolution stopped? Humans are getting worse, not better.

Reply Parent Score: 0

raver31 Member since:

Evolution is a fact, not a theory.

Look at your hand, see that thumb, what is it for ?
If you were to design a hand, an extra finger would be way better than a useless thumb.
A thumb used to be your dew-claw, it has evolved into half-finger, half claw.
It is the thing that allowed your ape ancestors to hold onto the branch instead of falling out of the tree.

Also, you say evolution has stopped ? Why then, when you take a walk around a museum, do all the clothes from the past look as if they will only fit children ?

And, what is your appendix for ? will you die when it is removed ? Nope, and your spleen ? also nope.

That is only humans, but I will give you an example of evolution that no-one can dispute;

Your house is infested with 1000 fruit flies, so you go down the shops and buy a fly killer spray. You spray madly around your house and 960 flies die.

A flaw in the genes of the remaining 40 flies makes them immune to the fly spray.

A couple of weeks later, there is 1000 flies again, the 40 flies have bred. So, you rush down and get the fly spray, no flies die this time.

The genes of the new batch are all immune to the fly spray, so, you go and get a stronger spray.

960 flies die, leaving 40. This 40 has another genetic flaw that means they are immune to the newer stronger fly spray.

Couple of weeks later, 1000 flies which are immune to both the new stronger spray, and the older weaker one are buzzing around your house.

This is evolution in action, survival of the fittest, and a species adapting to a situation.

Reply Parent Score: 5

lemur2 Member since:

I believe it's the *theory* of evolution.

There is both the *theory* of evolution AND the *fact* of evolution.

The *fact* is that species have evolved in the past, and continue to do so.

The *theory* is one possible explanation of how this happens.

You have two elements or cornerstones of that theory: inheritance of characteristics is one element, and selection is the other.

Inheritance provably happens ... well after the theory predicted a mechanism for inheritance, DNA was discovered.

Selection depends on weaker members of a species not surving to the point of being able to breed (or otherwise not breeding ... you can have evolution of characteristics through breeding preferences, such as in the lyre bird).

Also, why has the so-called evolution stopped?

If indeed it has stopped for humans, then one or both of the two fundamental mechanisms must no longer be happening.

Inheritance still happens, there is still DNA involved in reporduction.

Selection: maybe not. Most humans, stronger or weaker, now survive to the point of being able to breed.

Humans are getting worse, not better.

If the mechanism of selection in evolution of humans has indeed ceased, and most individuals survive and breed, then the end result would tend to be that the spread of human characteristics would increase in all directions at once. People will get both taller and shorter (ie more variation amongst individuals at either extreme). They will get both fatter and thinner. They will get both smarter and dumber.

Edited 2007-12-17 00:11

Reply Parent Score: 3

steviant Member since:

"Also, why has the so-called evolution stopped?"

What on earth makes you think that evolution has stopped? You don't have the perspective to say that because your lifetime is a fraction of a twinkle of a blink of an eye in evolutionary terms.

The time since the discovery of evolution is not even anywhere near long enough conclusively confirm Darwin's theory of evolution, so I don't see how anyone can conclusively deny Darwin's theory of evolution or confirm it, nor suggest that evolution has "stopped".

What we can say is that there is considerably more evidence in support of Darwin's theory than there is to debunk it. Many transitional fossils have been discovered more-or-less exactly "when", and "as" predicted based on fossils from predecessor and successor species. DNA was predicted before it was discovered (as touched on by another poster).

In the event that human evolution has slowed, history suggests that like aligators, elephants, sharks and other species that seem to have slowed to an evolutionary crawl, we no longer have to worry about being 'negative-selected' to be removed from the gene pool by predators. As a species, we may have found our niche, as it were.

Reply Parent Score: 4

dylansmrjones Member since:

Actually rats aren't how ancestors, but rather a rat-like mammal. Some would argue it was more mouse-like than rat-like, but point is that this cute little four-legged creature _could_ be the ancestor of all mammals (unless of course it is the descent of another mammal).

Claiming we descend from the rat is like claiming we descend from the cod... oh wait... ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1