“Linux represents a threat and an opportunity for every software and hardware company. Apple is once again at the crossroads. While it will take a couple of years before we know whether the company will make the right choice, one thing is clear: Apple’s path is about to become vastly more interesting” says Rob Enderle for TechNewsWorld.
Linux vs. Apple: An Uncomfortable Battle
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
“Both Red Hat (Nasdaq: RHAT) and Novell (Nasdaq: NOVL) are sending messages that they are designing new user interfaces based on the Mac OS”
this is a worthless comment. whats the source for this. ?
“The most common response I get from Apple advocates when I mention this threat is that Apple will sue the Linux providers. Given that the user interfaces could fall under the GPL , a lawsuit strategy will be problematic. We have only to look at SCO to see just how problematic this will become.”
again. worthless fud based on uninformed comments.
“The problem is that Linux buyers don’t want to pay a lot for software.”
i guess all those paying for oracle, redhat and novell are mere fantasies in someone’s mind.
this is a totally worthless article
Is ANYONE actually still listening to this guy?
You always know when his MS check clears because there is another openly hostile or thinly veiled anti Apple article.
>this is a worthless comment. whats the source for this. ?
In general, Gnome’s UI has been losely based on MacOS. Many Gnome devs and people who had a say in the design of Gnome 2.x were mac users for years (e.g. Seth Nickell, Jimmac etc). You won’t be able to find a document that says “yes, we were inspired off the Mac”, but it is pretty obvious that Gnome 2.x had parts of its visual design inspired by the classic MacOS (not necessarily from OSX).
more clueless drivel. I would suggest that none of his stuff gets posted anymore.
classic Enderle article with no facts to back up his statements. Please, this guy is just a Troll with a paycheck. Don’t waste your time with a response
“”Both Red Hat (Nasdaq: RHAT) and Novell (Nasdaq: NOVL) are sending messages that they are designing new user interfaces based on the Mac OS” ”
that guy is saying this. its not the same as gnome being inspired by classic macs
Why do people waste their time with this fool?
Enderlee is more manipulative and clueless than even Dvorak.
Linux is a UNIX derivitive now? Odd how it changes from being UNIX-like, to becoming a derivitive of proprietary software. Next, FreeBSD UNIX? Someone needs to poke this guy and remind him that BSD UNIX != FreeBSD.
Obviously most of you caught these things also, they are pretty blatent. I agree with the above posts — keep this guy off OSNews.
while the beginning of things was fine, when he took the idea of people are running linux on Xserves to mean people are overall running linux on their macs was bad. Linux is a good server OS, and running it on Xserves doesn’t seam to crazy. But that hardly means desktop users are doing the same. You just can’t take that path, and thus he drifts into crazyness.
Next to no one is going to buy a mac just for the hardware, maybe more common with the laptops, but if I buy a Powermac G5, there is no way I would run anything but OSX. Other wise I would just build a x86-64 box.
This arcticle was just a lot of nothing. He didn’t mention that MacOS has recently become the #2, meaning Apple is already losing relevance. He claims that both Red Hat and Novell are moving towards an OSX-style interface? Why? Because Gnome put their taskbar on top!?! Fedora doesn’t even do that by default.
What he said about Sun not only being a victim of Linux but also adding to their vulnerability is true, and somewhat interesting, but in general, this arcticle was just a lot of words that don’t say anything.
Another big thing he missed is that Apple is open sourcing a lot of their software as well. Darwin, the OSX Kernel (which is not FreeBSD) is open source, Safari is open source and Apple contributes to KHTML. Not only did he not mention the possibility of Apple moving more towards Open-Source software as a possible defense, he didn’t mention that they already are.
Rubbish.
Linux and Mac ARE competitors. They’re both competing for people tired of Windows. So far, Linux and the Mac have been successful in reasonably disjoint niches, but I do thing they are on a collision course. For the typical desktop user, Apple provides a overall better experience at the moment. But if the freedesktop.org’s projects like Cairo and Xserver, plus Gnome 3.0 or KDE 4.0 will provide as nice an experience as the MacOS in a few years, will will that leave Apple?
“But if the freedesktop.org’s projects like Cairo and Xserver, plus Gnome 3.0 or KDE 4.0 will provide as nice an experience as the MacOS in a few years, will will that leave Apple?”
apple is competing with mac hardware not commodity stuff like linux. its in a hardware nitch business using Mac os X as an incentive. thats why ms isnt worried about macs. apple doesnt need to worry
Huh? Isn’t it the other way around? The analysts are always pointing out that Apple is too dependent on hardware sales for revenue; people point this out as the reason why Apple can’t afford to move OS X to x86. While Apple is up-front about pricing the Xserve aggressively, OS X Server is priced much more aggressively, as they point out every chance they get. Enderle has just got it backwards… again.
With the Xserve, Macs have become far more competitive with other UNIces in the server space, while being easier to manage. And since they fall within the same price-range as the competing Dell-servers, while offering a better overall package, they may be a better choice for anyone looking for stability & support. I honestly dont see the threat here, other than Apple’s apparent complacency in putting more marketing money on their servers.
The reasons Sun got cut down to size have to do with more than just their ridiculously overpriced & underpowered hardware: it was also their general lack of direction and their failure to acknowledge/tackle the competition posed by Linux at that time.
The author, OTOH, has no clue as always.
Nothing really to say. You guys did a excellent job flaming him. Do not think that I could do any better.
i hate all this troll calling on here! everyone is apparently a troll. I happen to like the article.
For me BOTH MacOSX and Linux are VERY good OS’es. Fighting on which is better is like fighting which disto of linux is better. In the end its purly choice to which one makes you feel at home!
I think the whole debate is stupid really. M$ is the ONLY ONE bringing bad software to the market. If your not using m$ then your fine.
Thank you for letting us know who the author of this item is before we clicked on the link. I was almost…ALMOST interested in reading this…until I noticed the authors name.
I think MS should be the company that’s worrying and not Apple. Apple has shown time and time again that it can invent and reinvent itself. More and more people from the MS camp are moving to Linux.
If they compete at all it is because neither one of them are Microsoft. Other than that, the products are appealing for very different reasons. I am running Mandrake becaue my copy of Windows expired and I can think of better things to spend $300 on for the time being.
It does enough of what I need it to do to get by, and my girlfriend only ever uses Firefox and Gaim.
But I would need to be fired from my job, framed for an expensive crime, and sued (by MS) before I would rather keep using Linux to save the $300 needed for another Windows license.
BTW, I like this part.
“The recent and highly visible Windows migrations are at risk: Munich’s IT department is badly stalled and running overbudget due to compatibility issues; the Thailand Linux win apparently has simply resulted in a large number of students removing Linux and loading pirated copies of Windows; and Home Depot (NYSE: HD) failed its Linux migration due to cost overruns. Windows migrations to Linux still look ill-advised and way too risky”
Linux is not in the same class as Apple or windows and won’t be for a very, very long time.
“Linux is not in the same class as Apple or windows and won’t be for a very, very long time.”
apple,mac and linux are different kind of operating systems with their own credits and the guy is just stupid
Hopefully, Apple and Linux will not be competitors as much as partners in a united front to provide a cool alternative to MS dominance, sharing software applications and a unix philosophy.
“I am running Mandrake becaue my copy of Windows expired and I can think of better things to spend $300 on for the time being. ”
And how does a copy of windows expire? Was this some demo or beta or something?
…he makes it look as if he’s going to write a critical article about Mac, and he ends criticizing – or, more precisely, belittling – Linux. Come on, the Home Depot story is from, like, three years ago! He completely ignores the advances of Linux in POS market share. And the Munich migration issues are mostly due to the legendary inertia of bureaucracies.
Slashdot provides a mechanism for users to filter front page articles based on the posting editor.
Eugenia, it would be similarly useful if OSNews offered users a keyword filter for front pages articles before wasting bandwidth and eye movements (calories) on stories by snake-oil shills like Enderle.
Windows XP product activation has a 30 day deadline, I own a valid XP pro CD key, but it is already mapped to another hardware ID. I have an XP home key for the system but prefer XP pro.
And how does a copy of windows expire? Was this some demo or beta or something?
He is full of crap and lying so don’t worry about it. You can tell WinXP FUD posts by two distinct things, first he talks about his copy of Windows “expiring”, and second he quotes the price for XP as $300.
Yeah thats the retail price. I don’t know ANYONE who has ever paid that.
Basically this guy is either full of crap or is a software pirate who is trying to go straight and dosen’t know how to shop for lower pricing. OEM and upgrade versions dude. Its not that hard and it dosen’t cost $300.
Well I am obviously not a pirate since I plan to buy the license and own one for another system already.
I am using a “regular” copy of windows becasue I needed it the day I bought it to reinstall on my dads PC.
I have never used upgrade versions and don’t plan to start. Besides the XP home “quick restore” disk annoys me.
OEM copies are a great idea, but I can’t use an OEM license on the install I need to activate.
And you call me a pirate, but in case you missed the memo, anything but corp CD keys need to also go through Microsoft’s product acivation.
If you didn’t know this, you are the pirate, not me.
If I want to activate my copy of windows, I can call MS, and they will charge me $290.
I can pay like $230 +shipping and then wait 4 days for the OEM copy to get here just to have to reinstall the OS. Or deal with it and shell out the other $60 to get a license over the phone.
PS, if you think I am spitting anti-Microsoft FUD, then maybe you meed to read the rest of my post where I said there is basically no way in hell I will keep using Linux on my desktop.
Be honest no “true believers” or “Trolls”.
Can Xserve function well as a PDC for windows clients? If so, have any of you actually done it? If so, what is the best source of information on how to do it?
My career would be at stake if it isn’t ready for prime time. Otherwise I will just use a Windows 2003 server.
Please advise.
>> Can Xserve function well as a PDC for windows clients? If so, have any of you actually done it? If so, what is the best source of information on how to do it?
Here:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:9m9ITMzKThsJ:www.nwfusion.com/…
Apple and Linux have more of a symbiotic relationship than a competetive one. Apple users are looking for that polished Apple experience. Some Linux users use Linux because they can’t afford a Mac and they hate Microsoft. I happen to own a Mac and a PC. OS X on the Mac and Suse Linux on the PC. Apple developers borrow from the Konqueror code base for Safari and also put code back into the project. As far as Novell and Red Hat cloning the Mac interface, that is ridiculous. These companies use the totally original Gnome and KDE environments. Apple is a great example of how open source will shape the software market.
Always avoid articles by Enderle, Didiot & Thurott, unless you prefer fiction.
>Can Xserve function well as a PDC for windows clients? If so,
> have any of you actually done it? If so, what is the best
>source of information on how to do it?
http://www.samba.org
No really, I like him. I want to be like him when I turn 15 and move out of my parents’ basement…
/~ Apple sinks,
Linux stinks,
MS ist the waaaay! ~/
Now seriously: I fail to understand why anyone is still paying attention to this scumbag.
Once again he misses the point. Apple has it’s niche. Apple makes money. Thousands of designers, video producers, musicians and general Apple devotees aren’t going to jump ship because of GNU/Linux. Companies like Adobe*, Microsoft, Macromedia aren’t going to ditch Apple because they still make money out of the platform.
Also he seems to think if I buy an Xserve and load GNU/Linux on it, Apple’s “margins will collapse”. Wrong again. Apple makes it’s real money on HARDWARE. NOT SOFTWARE. They have big margins. What a moron.
At least, I suppose he felt cool writing it on his Ferrari laptop.
Why even link to this rubbish, this guy’s opinion are consistently misinformed and just plain brain-damaged.
*I know about Premiere, but that was because Apple had a superior, competing product, big deal. There’s always going to be Photoshop and InDesign on Mac.
How about this: OS X on the desktop and Linux on the server? Can’t they combine forces to knock Microsoft out? Might save a lot of time and trouble…
Linux cheerleaders have always talked about “World Domination Now”.
If Linux wants to co-habitate with MacOSX, Novell and Redhat should cede that to Apple and only focus on server markets where Apple is clearly not interested. MacOSX on the desktop and Linux on the server – wouldn’t life be grand?. But that’s not happening. Linux on the server and Windows on the desktop is what the reality is.
As they say in war, keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Right now Mac OSX is Linux’s worst enemy for the desktop and that’s why you see people on this board say things like “Apple is a great example of how open source will shape the software market”. Apple is not interested in open source ok!. That’s why you don’t have iTunes for Linux.
Rob may be right about this….Apple’s seen the writing and they have decided to forget about desktops and go into iPods. The success for iPods only came when they released a Windows client.
Well, I think this guy wrote a good article– and unlike most people here I tend not to look at what he has written before. I simply don’t give a damn. Have you people actually read the article? Because if you did, you’d see he makes some interesting points.
is on my ignore list. For reasons search for “Enderle” at Groklaw, it’s all over there. Just raising my voice:)
This story is not very accurate. But anyway, Apple will lose a lot of users when Linux becomes “good enough”. Of course, that only accounts for the bottom layer of users that are price-concious and do not fall into the specialised Apple target audience (media & creative arts).
I guess his definition of “subsidizes” is a bit questionable.
I suppose he means that the money Apple makes on hardware pays for their software development costs, which is a really wierd point to make.
A far more interesting point is that their software is the only thing making people want to pay more money for less performance on the Mac side.
I’m not anti-mac, but it’s a fact that in it’s continuing battle with M$, Linux has actually kicked Unix in the head. It could be argued that MacOS is a “Unix” meaning it’s at least an indirect target of the Linux march towards the desktop.
I tend to agree that Apple has it’s niche, but for a lot of people, a slick desktop combined with a slick case (and there are slick X86 cases: http://www.iwill.net/zmax/pics/ZMAX_angle.jpg) is the reason many users put up with the macintosh inconvenience. Linux is definitely poses a threat to any and all software, especially close/non-free software.
However, I don’t know if Rob Enderle really drove that point home.
I guess his definition of “subsidizes” is a bit questionable.
I suppose he means that the money Apple makes on hardware pays for their software development costs, which is a really wierd point to make.
It’s a weird point to make because, although true, it doesn’t make sense with the rest of his article. On the other hand, if you take the real definition of the phrase “Software Subsidizing Hardware”, meaning that the money they make on software covers the discounted cost of their hardware, it would make perfect sense in the context of his article. Unfortunately, it’s just not true. Apple doesn’t make money from most of their software, and the hardware subsidizes the software. If everyone goes out and buys XServes and installs Linux on them, then Apple’s still perfectly fine, and making decent money.
A far more interesting point is that their software is the only thing making people want to pay more money for less performance on the Mac side.
People pay for Macs for a variety of reasons, and in some cases their performance really is better (sometimes not by much, and definitely not in all cases, but it does happen). In the end, it comes down to a mixture of hardware and software design, and the individual’s view of the machine.
I’m not anti-mac, but it’s a fact that in it’s continuing battle with M$, Linux has actually kicked Unix in the head. It could be argued that MacOS is a “Unix” meaning it’s at least an indirect target of the Linux march towards the desktop.
Given that Mac OS X is the biggest desktop Unix, and that Linux will eventually compete for the market in the same way it’s competing for the server market today, it’s very likely that Apple will find itself in the fallout zone for the desktop war. What really remains to be seen is whether or not Apple will be able to compete in that situation. There are a lot more variables in the server space that lead to Linux taking over much of the Unix market.
I tend to agree that Apple has it’s niche, but for a lot of people, a slick desktop combined with a slick case (and there are slick X86 cases: http://www.iwill.net/zmax/pics/ZMAX_angle.jpg) is the reason many users put up with the macintosh inconvenience. Linux is definitely poses a threat to any and all software, especially close/non-free software.
So you really have to wonder if Apple would be willing to open up the rest of their OS when/if they start to lose market share to Linux. The only problem that tends to lead to is the possibility of a complete port of Mac OS X to x86, at which point Apple’s losing hardware revenue, because there are plenty of people that want to run Apple’s software but don’t want to pay for their hardware.
Linux vs. Apple is like Male versus Female gender wars.
It’s a non-issue. Macs are best of breeds and Linux is the duck tape of computing.
What Enderle did is introducing and describing a problem where there is none, just like men-hating liberal feminist drones do.
So let’s see:
Rob Enderle quotes:
“Apple will move to X86 by the end of 2003”. (This said after G5 announcement)
“Apple will be forced to move to X86” because of Linux.(What??)
“IBM will be forced to release BlueLinux because of Sun Java desktop system”
“The Acer Ferrari Laptop is a fanatastic Laptop which gets you noticed at meeting thanks to its vroom vroom sound at startup”
“Apple software subsidised the Hardware”
There is no discussion the Troll of the year award 2004 goes to Rob Enderle. And the year is not over yet..
Anyone who thinks Linux will kill Apple has never used an Apple.
Nothing against Linux, it’s clobbering microsoft in the quality, reliability area.
It’s where you go when you want better & cheaper OS then microsoft.
Both Apple and Linux are cleaning microsoft’s clock with quality.
This Apple laptop is the only laptop I’ve ever used where you can depend on hibernation to actually work. After four( Micron, Gateway, Dell, IBM ) and Microsoft os, this is the only laptop where it actually works, every day.
Apple’s got their niche. And Apple users are happy to see Linux succeed.
Steve Jobs can base more and more of OS X on linux if he wishes as long as we Apple users get the quality we expect.
one word
vrooooom
Rob Enderle is a Paid Troll. No one need pay attention to this clueless idiot, I’ve had many (polite) email exchanges with him and his lack of technical understanding is profound considering his profession. He – has – no – clue. At all. God I wish I was paid as well as he is and get away knowing jack shit. Same fella who’s associated Linux (potential) use with terrorism now sounds, vaguely, like he’s pro-linux. Weird. Whatever sells.
Predictions of the future of Apple based on Suns failure is probably not relevant. The problem with Sun is that they can’t decide on what leg to stand. One day they they like opensource, the next they dont. This way they appear as unreliable bothe to people looking for propriatory and FOSS solutions. Apple have no such problems.
I stopped reading when he said that Solaris was based off of FreeBSD just as MacOS X is.
It was as if he wrote this article after having read some things, and took no time to educate himself. I am always willing to listen to all sides of an issue, but when someone so clearly passes biased flawed and poorly researched opinions as a techological facts, you lose me.
This article is totally idiotic and the author probably only has read press releases.
Between Linux and Apple are miles.
There are various issues which have to be targeted in linux until it even can be a barely thread to apple.
a) Driver install, the module mechanism is not userfriendly, I like most Linux users don´t care, but the average user does.
b) X is a constant pain once things don´t work out of the box
c) The desktop integration becomes better, but still is lousy, the main target should be to move to a common compoind document model
d) software installation, this is an issue which never can be resolved fully, given the problem that linux always is a moving target. There are various nice methods for installation like zeroinstall or apt, but none of them fully can resolve dependency and legacy file issues (apt does to a big degree but sometimes also fails)
Those are severy basic problems, Apple has nothing to fear in this regard, in fact many unix users move currently over to apple, because they can get the best of both works.
Nowadays Apple is the only serious workstation producer in existence, once Novell Sun and others are finished they might get the workstation market back they used to own, but not the enduser segment, where Apple is strongest.
Enderle is more full of shit than the bantering moron in the cube beside me.
Why does anyone even post his crap as news anymore, it should fall under, “grotesque rhetoric.”
This is not news, it’s mindless dribble from a moron. Don’t post his shit, it’s not news, it’s not journalism, it’s paid advertisements, and it’s crappy at that.
For what “inconveniences” do the majority of Mac users suffer? Ease of use? Good stability? Running the major apps that are also available for Windows? Reasonable compatibility with *nix?
I second just about every comment here. This guy is a real tool. I mean he has seriously missed the boat. Im an OSX and Linux user, and they both do what they are good at very well. But, to say that as soon as Linux gets a UI similar to OSX, Apple is in trouble is completley ludicrous.
Apple is certainly a niche product, (albiet one that I love), that does the Audio/Video industry better than anyone. Someone tell me where Final Cut Pro, Shake3, Soundtrack, DVD Studio Pro, iLife apps, MS Office and Photoshop are for Linux. Thats just the tip of the iceberg too.
Linux runs all my servers and its done so better than anything out there, but its gonna take a whole lot more than a better UI to get it back on my desktop……(I ran SuSE then Gentoo on my desktop for about 2 years while mastering Linux)……for me right now it doesnt get any better than OSX on my powerbook.
“…server markets where Apple is clearly not interested”
Ever hear of XServer and OS X Server?
“Apple is not interested in open source ok!”
Umm…then why did they contribute code back to KHTML? Why are they using Samba? How about GCC? Apple does use open source technology and does contribute code back. Goe to their ADC web site and grab source code. There is plenty of it there including Darwin.
“Apple’s seen the writing and they have decided to forget about desktops and go into iPods”
I don’t understand why you say that since their SEC filings clearly indicate that computer sales are still a vital part of the company and that they are increasing in the number of units sold.
“Apple is not interested in open source ok!”
You are misinformed. Did you not know that OS X is based on the open source FreeBSD OS. They update OS X using FreeBSD technology frequently. They have also open sourced the core of their version of th OS X and called it Darwin. Their kernel is also an open source project. Do your homework.
I’m not going to respond to that. If you’re a mac user, I’m glad you found workarounds, but frankly, you know what “inconveniences” i’m talking about and if the benefits of the platform outweigh the drawbacks for you, great. But don’t try and pretend using a mac doesn’t come with sacrifices.
These discussions are what worry me. I want to deploy an Xserve as a PDC, but I am afraid to do it politically. My only concern is what will happen if their is just one small glitch. If a window server needs rebooting every saturday from the Antivirus software scan, nobody says anything.
Its too bad but true. Linux, BSD and Apple’s OS X suffer from the masses not really knowing. A lot of people are only familiar with their windows desktop, and think that the rest of the computing world is just like it. Even the old Mainframe guys are shocked! Our windows servers are so bad that it almost gives them justification to keep our old 20 year mainframe apps. Our mainframe crashed ONCE in 5 years, and it was our fault!
This is 1960’s technology!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Our MS exchange server crashes every saturday during a scan. The software is NOT improving, and is not as revolutionary as MS has many people believe.
It is so hard to explain the advantage to using somthing like Linux, BSD, or OS X to a manager! Despite my belief, I think I am going support the DARK side and deploy Windows 2003. I don’t want to put my career at risk.
🙁
why should apple let history repeat itself?
Your right fchi1.hawkcommunications.com in seeing history repeat itself.
Apple should have added their gui to Linux, in the same way they should have to DOS.
In fact they should do it now and call it FUJI or something.
Why not have more than one product line?
In general, Gnome’s UI has been losely based on MacOS. Many Gnome devs and people who had a say in the design of Gnome 2.x were mac users for years (e.g. Seth Nickell, Jimmac etc). You won’t be able to find a document that says “yes, we were inspired off the Mac”, but it is pretty obvious that Gnome 2.x had parts of its visual design inspired by the classic MacOS (not necessarily from OSX).
I think that all GUIs take something from the Macintosh. It is hard not to be influenced by Apple. I think the Gnome and KDE UI are designed to resemble Windows, not the Macintosh. The default Gnome configuration puts a Windows style toolbar on the bottom of the screen. The icons are placed on the left of the screen. Gnome 2.6 even has a “Computer” icon similar to Windows’ “My Computer” icon.
and then have people wondering whether they should buy iLife for G5 or iLife for x86-64? or the Linux/DOS/BSD version? the idea is that it’s simple. Joe Average reads the box and sees system requirements: OS X, can discern that’s what he has based on the big X when he starts his computer and that’s it.
atm, apple is selling hardware at the consumer level that i would argue is an order of magnatude better then PC counterparts. x86-64, while not a bad piece of kit, is an instruction set based on a crummy instruction set. it’s like adding more features to windows: no matter what awesome things you add, its still based on a pile of crap.
and what did amd and intel do to improve their speed? they use an x86 interpreter to a RISC processor. i’d rather have a G5 with a native RISC instruction set then having my instructions interpretted before execution.
putting an x86-64 in a mac would be like putting a gas motor from an ford escort into a diesel audi just so you could run on gas. sure you could probably get it to work, but you’d be severely hindering that car’s potential.
the current line of PowerPC processors from IBM beat out x86-64s in almost every way. do you think every game vendor (Nintendo, Sony, even Microsoft) is using them in their next console (not x86-64s) because they’re pretty? no, because they are architecturally superior.
i’d rather see windows (basically the only OS that doesn’t run on PPC) move to PowerPC, or at least more OEM PowerPC parts available to consumers. its time to drop x86 and its deritives.
Apple is not interested in open source ok!.
Not too bright are you?
http://www.apple.com/ca/macosx/features/darwin/
“Apple is certainly a niche product, (albiet one that I love), that does the Audio/Video industry better than anyone. Someone tell me where Final Cut Pro, Shake3, Soundtrack, DVD Studio Pro, iLife apps, MS Office and Photoshop are for Linux. Thats just the tip of the iceberg too.”
Hmm and how about the Amiga?
MS Office and Photoshop run on “Linux” using WINE. Shake runs on “Linux” and IRIX as well, native. I do not know the other programs, but i do know this subject in general has been debunked by A nun he moos, me, and some other people in other a-like threads on OSnews.com.
For example when i take CAD programs as example i find SO many CAD programs: FLOSS ones, proprietary/commercial one’s, Windows ones which run throught WINE, etc. Literally, loads, and presummably the quality differs. With little Googling i found myself who sites and mailinglists dedicated to just CAD (and CAE, and alike). No CAD for Linux? Untrue; do research!
Also, in which way does Apple compete with SGI’s Tezro or Onyx4?
Though i’d agree -with my small experience in this field- “Linux” professional audio is still a bit (too) hard (ALSA) and on IRIX well i do not think IRIX is particulary good at this (the soundcards in any SGI workstation i’ve worked with were of awesome quality though).
i’m talking about and if the benefits of the platform outweigh the drawbacks for you, great. But don’t try and pretend using a mac doesn’t come with sacrifices.>>
I’m curious what sacrafices do you percieve?
I find it has all the power and flexibity of Unix and none of the kruftyness of Linux Desktops.
If you’re talking about the “sacrifice” of not being able to run it native on an x86 based box, um, I rate that as the same “sacrifice” as not being able to run W98/2k/XP native on PPC.
If you’re talking about the “sacrifice” of there being no $400 new mac, I also rate that with the “sacrifice” of paying paying more for a used Acura Integra than I would’ve paid for a brand new Ford Focus.
Hard, isn’t it?
Don’t draw it too much to your own experience. Possibile arguments can be found according to me in:
– Vendor lock-in.
– More expensive hard- and software; less available software.
– Software / desktop preferences, learning curves, hardware technical design.
– Server-related things (I do not think MacOSX supports NSS-LDAP, for example.)
– Performance vs price.
– Companies ethics.
– Emotional value.
Some count both ways for some. Doh! I’m not saying viable arguments for YOU could be found here either. Buying a computer is always a very relative decision; there’s no absolute price.
I’d rather have a cheap x86 with Debian GNU/Linux, a driver’s license, and a car than an expensive Mac with some professional audio/video software and a bicycle. I need the car for work. If you already have a driver’s license, a car, orare fine with a bicycle and/orearn money with the professional audio/video software the relative price changes.
(K5 had an interesting article on that one the other day.)
– More expensive hard- and software; less available software>>
Hardware costs are about the same. (It costs more to walk in the door at Apple, but you’re less likely to need to purchase PCI expansion cards to add various periferal goodies.)
Software costs are about the same vs Windows.
No platform has every piece of software, but under OS X, a user not only has all the apps written for OS X (MS Office, FCP, Macromedia products, Adobe products, etc) if the user has elected to install X windows and wants to futz around with Fink, a whole slew of open source *nix apps can be run.
(Basically, I’ve yet to not find an app I needed to get a job done.)
—
Thanks for bringing up your points in a non-flamey way.
Now I differ with your opinion on several of them, but I can’t say that you’re wrong, just that you “think different”. (pun intended.)
you can think whatever you like, but as far as desktop environments go mac is better. it’s that simple. nothing you argue will CHANGE that.
“Now I differ with your opinion on several of them, but I can’t say that you’re wrong.”
No, i did not state these possible arguments are my opinion. Those were merely arguments i’ve heard before which i stated since one was not able to imagine counter-arguments. With only a few of these i can say i agree, and with those i am able to back up my opinion. The other ones i cannot back up as of now (this will become apparant in the end of my post
, and some of the list are extremely subjective (ethics, emotional value — obviously, and can go the other way as well. Intel’s, Microsoft’s ethics… Emotional value for Apple hardware…).
“Hardware costs are about the same. (It costs more to walk in the door at Apple)”
As what? Mind you, i have not named x86-32 (SGI is competing with Apple as well on some areas), but i take it you are comparing with x86-32. Can you give examples? Compares where the performance, features and price are about the same or where Apple is according to you a better alternative than the x86-32 “counterpart”?
“but you’re less likely to need to purchase PCI expansion cards to add various periferal goodies.)”
Can you give examples? The PC’s i see online are what i define as “pretty much complete”. For me, at least. 2×00-3×00 MHz 32 bit processor, expandable mainboard, reasonable soundcard, video card able to play games/3D work at reasonable performance, 1xx GB HDD, Cheap RTL8139 NIC, 2x boxes, 17″ monitor, all with cables is est. my definition of current standard. Personally i’m not interested into buying (such) a PC though. What does low-end / low-budget Apple hardware come with what isn’t included with commodity x86 hardware? Firewire is the only thing i can think of as of now. Well, and a monitor, though that might be standard as well.
What about laptops? What about the 2nd hand market? Embedded computers (ie. for a firewall)?
“if the user has elected to install X windows and wants to futz around with Fink, a whole slew of open source *nix apps can be run.”
Yeah, that’s great. It adds value for some people. SGI has something similar (freeware.sgi.com), i very much enjoy that.
Compares where the performance, features and price are about the same or where Apple is according to you a better alternative than the x86-32 “counterpart”
for laptops, apple has x86-32 beat. i recently priced a 12″ sony vaio for a family member. the only thing the sony had that an equivelent powerbook couldn’t offer was a dvd-burner and about $1500 extra on the price tag.
even my powerbook (15″ Ti) beat the sony in specs and its almost a year old (10 months) and i paid about $900 less then the sony for it.
don’t even mention dell laptops, the two i’ve seen that people just got are bigger then my laptop from 5 years ago (and i thought that was huge then). and anything with centrino is far more underpowered (IPC-wise) then a PowerPC, which is a shame since its running at similar or lower clock speeds then the PPC.
on the other side of the fence (playing devils advocate) and not to bash the guy with the free X11 comment. you can get a X server for almost every operating system. i’m running one in windows (at work), with cygwin i pretty much have all the unix-y goodness at my finger tips from within windows. unfortunately the base OS is still windows, but that wasn’t my point.
Re: “Apple is certainly a niche product, (albiet one that I love), that does the Audio/Video industry better than anyone. Someone tell me where Final Cut Pro, Shake3, Soundtrack, DVD Studio Pro, iLife apps, MS Office and Photoshop are for Linux. Thats just the tip of the iceberg too.”
Dpi, was correct in what he replied. The list is really to long to go into here but he is correct that there is more ported apps for Linux than what your I presume Linux ignorance lacks in your statement. Several Windows apps actually work well on Linux with Wine like MS Office using Codeweavers CrossOver Office 3.0. I though still prefer using native Linux ports like KDE Kontact ( http://www.kde.org/screenshots/images/3.2/snapshot14b.png ) with Open Office. Apple’s FCP is not ported to any other platform just like OSX because of Apple vendor lock in. Sorry that’s not for me or many other film, animation and game studios who prefer to have choices as well as a good product for their money. Choices like being able to run XSI, Maya Unlimited, Houdini, Shake, Photoshop (thanks to Disney), Gimp, Cinepaint, Smoke, Piranha, etc on Linux. Can I get those apps on OSX? Well yes for Photoshop and Shake but that’s it out of that list and that’s not the entire list of apps and tools available to the Linux community for both professionals or for typical PC users.
Then there is the hardware lock in factor that Apple is notorious of. It’s nice to know since switching from Windows to Linux that I can still use professional hardware such as DCC/CAD supported graphics cards with my professional software that requires it. I couldn’t seem to locate the highend cards on the Apple site. Where are they? Answer, none existant. As for Apple’s precious G5 PPC Motorola 64-bit CPU well there is not much that can take advantage of that right now. You really don’t need 64-bit to run paint programs like Photoshop or Gimp or even editing. Though I am surprised when I had seen test results from Maya and Mental Ray render tests on a dual G5 with 4 GB RAM that it did so badly. See the Zoo Render benchmarks at http://www.zoorender.com/ for more info. Since the G5 did so poorly in render tests it leads me to believe it would do just as poorly with games as well. Oh I’m sorry, can you run games on OSX? Let me know if I’m mistaken since I’d like to see if I could get my DirectX/OpenGL games to run on OSX just like it did on Linux with WineX.
My point is that in future before posting such harsh comments you should do a little research yourself. I don’t set out in my postings to put down other platforms but I do try to clarify for others what is fact and what is fable. If Apple provides what you need then great. I always believe in using what works but when it comes to making an upgrade, system, software or hardware purchase. I though do see more cons than pros by going the Apple way. I’ve tried many Linux distros and was a former long time defender of Windows but now I’m very happy using SuSE Linux 9.1 Professional. It suits all my requirements in an OS which is what a consumer looks for when making a purchase.
“Linux is not in the same class as Apple or windows and won’t be for a very, very long time.”
No, Linux out strips windows by miles with quality, security and stability! Linux is very comparable to macs. Just macs are a different tast. Thats all.
You can surely not be implying that Gnome uses Apple source code. The statement in the article DID imply this very thing. It stated, in thinly veiled terms, that Gnome infringes on Apple’s intellectual property. If you expect people to swallow that you are crazy. Now, one of the site administrators is trying to back this up!!! How much is Microsoft paying you Eugenia?
you do know that apple owns Shake, right? and gimp, cinepaint (or film gimp), maya complete (ok so you don’t get hair, fur, and fluid that comes with unlimited), a native version of photoshop. don’t sell OS X short.
you don’t make the choice of software availability, software companies do. i could say you’re just as locked in because you have to use linux for x86. can you even use a full x86-64 installation? (suse 9.1 for AMD64 is not end to end 64-bit, btw) and what if i have joe’s flavor of the day linux running on an alpha processor, will the software still work? using proprietary software on any platform doesn’t equal choice. open file formats and open standards gives you choice. being able to create and/or use software for OS X or linux to open houdini, shake, smoke, etc. files is choice. the software you use to edit those files has little to do with choice.
since when is zoorender an authority on benchmarks? their “click render and see how long it takes” benchmarking is not the most accurate or scientific i’ve seen, nor are they using an a version of OS X that can take advantage of the G5, the list goes on. if you’re going to site benchmarks, at least site them from a reputable source.
the games thing is an old tired comment. yes i can run games, the two finest game studios in business release all their games for OS X (blizzard and id). if game companies don’t think they can make money porting their games to OS X, that doesn’t make it a non-viable platform for gaming, it just means people need to start being vocal about getting game ported to OS X. its been proven again and again that it is a viable and apparantly profittable (for id and blizzard at least) gaming platform.
i don’t mean to flame, but you’re a suse 9.1 user. you probably haven’t configured and compiled you’re own kernel. you’re using a distribution that makes it difficult to happily install packages from other distributions (i’d say that about any rpm based distro, last i checked anyway). if you’ve said you moved from windows to slackware, debian, gentoo, and made all these seemingly intelligent comments, i may have thought twice about refuting your claims. but come on, my mom uses suse 9.1.
oh, and tell SGI that 64-bit isn’t needed for imaging or video, they might be upset that they’ve wasted so many years developing and selling 64-bit processors that they might look into moving down to 32-bit.
“No, Linux out strips windows by miles with quality, security and stability! Linux is very comparable to macs. Just macs are a different tast. Thats all.”
Mouarf arf arf arf! Linux as much stable as MacosX…
MacosX is more stable than linux, i use both, here are the reason:
-> micro kernel
-> Apple do the hardware and the os, so they know their hardware
-> Aqua is more stable that any big window manager (i think about gnome and kde)
-> micro kernel
the microkernel vs monolithic kernel debate is old and tired. linux has many features of a microkernel, without going all the way and suffering the standard performance hit. just cause its a microkernel doesnt make it stable.
-> Apple do the hardware and the os, so they know their hardware
again, a relative statement. i can compile linux to only work with the hardware i have installed, and not bother with anything else available. does that mean ive suddenly got a more stable system then macos? driver quality has absolutely nothing to do with the range of supported hardware.
-> Aqua is more stable that any big window manager (i think about gnome and kde)
im assuming thats opinion. i would love to hear a figure of, say number of crashes/month of heavy usage on a mac, windows, and linux.
this guy is a special kind of idiot. i wish i could get his salary for running my mouth off about stuff i know next to nothing about and make it sound important. i particularily like how mac and solaris are based off FreeBSD. news to me…
“XSI, Maya Unlimited, Houdini, Shake, Photoshop (thanks to Disney), Gimp, Cinepaint, Smoke, Piranha, etc on Linux”
..ofcourse those which require WINE only run on Linux/x86-32 (maybe x86-64 as well). All of the above, except for Photohop (only out of date version), run on IRIX as well.
I’ve searched a ‘lil bit on Apple’s Dutch site yesterday and i didn’t found it cheap at all. As for x86-32, it doesn’t count to me when it includes software since i do not need (that) software. It might count for others in the compare though. A friend of mine bought a fast Transmeta laptop which is very energy-friendly (important imo) for only 800 EUR, without any software with it included. I do not know the exact specs currently; it would be a nice example to as comparision (for me, that is).
“oh, and tell SGI that 64-bit isn’t needed for imaging or video, they might be upset that they’ve wasted so many years developing and selling 64-bit processors that they might look into moving down to 32-bit.”
1) Depends on the situation.
2) They also sold 32-bit computers
3) SGI’s NUMA aims for other things as well.
This is a great article, whether it’s over the head of posters here or not, who obviously have nothing to offer in retort other than personal attacks. Here are the main points in a nutshell:
1. Linux is hyped to threaten Microsoft, however in reality it has not, in the least, as Microsoft’s profits and market share are at record levels and only going higher, right now at 90% of all desktop and 70% of all server operating system software sales. What Linux IS threatening is other flavors of *nix, especially *nix on non-Intel processors like Sun Solaris, and Apple on the desktop will be next, they have already been passed as the #2 desktop O/S by Linux.
2. Apple charges a premium for their systems for the software, NOT their hardware, which is basically overpriced for it’s performance. If/when Linux is modded to emulate OSX’s interface, which is what cloneware does, imitate others, then no one will be interested in paying more for Apple’s relatively poor price/performing hardware. Apple will then be forced to build better hardware rather than software, a complete shift in their philosophy that may not bode well for their future.
3. Here’s what Apple can do about it, although there are problems with each alternative. They can allow cloneware to destroy OSX software value and try to build exceptional hardware, but that’s a new paradigm for them. They can sue anyone who tries to copy their GUI, which may or may not work, or they can become a pure software play and port OSX to cheaper better performing Intel. But they will be forced to do something, right now it looks like selling MP3 devices is keeping them afloat but that’s a lousy ending for a former tech giant.
Unfortunately, that’s exactly how this is playing out, at least so far. Free software may or may not be inevitable, but if it is, all our software companies are going to be stressed if not permanently damaged.
Apple is already making profit on its hardware, not its software. They are already a hardware company.
as Microsoft’s profits and market share are at record levels and only going higher, right now at 90% of all desktop and 70% of all server operating system software sales.¨
Uh, no. MS Server sales for 2003 represented about 38% of the total number of servers, a number which has held steady for the past few years. It has grown in absolute numbers only because the market has grown as a whole. Meanwhile, sales of Linux servers have outpaced market growth each year for the past six years. You may not consider this a threat, but Microsoft certainly does!
By the way, the reason people here attack Rob Enderle is because he is a paid MS mouthpiece who has in the past compared Linux users to communists and terrorists. Then again, that fits well with your own anti-Linux ramblings, so I guess we shouldn’t be surprised…
“Microsoft’s profits and market share are at record levels and only going higher, right now at 90% of all desktop and 70% of all server operating system software sales.”
1) Profits do not say much.
2) You cannot, in all honesty of accuracy, use the same % when referring to market share AND profits.
3) I do not believe the % of the server selling.
4) As said in 1, sold != used in production space. Not every sell is as important as the other. Selling one as OEM with some desktop is easy, now try to sell the garbage to the datacentre…
“which is what cloneware does”
Haha so what has Microsoft invented?
“Free software may or may not be inevitable, but if it is, all our software companies are going to be stressed if not permanently damaged.”
Possibly. Tough. Adapt or die.
wow….
“This is a great article, whether it’s over the head of posters here or not, who obviously have nothing to offer in retort other than personal attacks”
actually, the only way you would accept something that full of inconsistancies and outright falsehoods is if it is over your head.
1. i really dont know what your smoking, but i want some. just a question, did you pull those figures out of the air? or can you link to where you got them? microsoft has publicly stated linux is its #2 threat. so even if you dont believe it, they do.
2. apple makes its money off hardware, NOT software. apple software is just there as an incentive to buy the hardware. analysts have been saying this has been apples biggest stumbling block for years now. again, please tell me, where exactly did you come to this conclusion?
3. by cloneware i assume you mean linux.
#1, how is linux copying mac? it was one of the more confusing statements in enderles “article”, the assumption is he was talking about GNOME, which is far from being a copy of OSX.
#2 x86 based architechtures are very cheap, but as the saying goes, you get what you pay for. there are very, very few ways that x86 beats PPC. its low cost vs quality, in the business world, low cost will alwas win. in the home market, it should be different.
#3 apple going pure software would entail losing the core of their revenue, which is hardware sales. which would make no sense. one of the biggest reason this article is being trashed so much is that the entire premise is faulty. apple doesnt make their money off software, they make it off hardware. if you buy an apple computer, and install linux, they wont care. their only loss is in marketshare.
please dont get your facts from mr. enderle or the people like him. he has proven himself to be an idiot with little to no understanding of either technology or the IT marketplace.
Still haven’t settled on a username I see. No wonder since your points are always wrong.
Uh, no. MS Server sales for 2003 represented about 38% of the total number of servers, a number which has held steady for the past few years.
Uh yes. I got the figure right off of OSNEWS…
<a href=”On” rel=”nofollow”>http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7184″>On a shipment basis, Windows dominated all others with 69.4 percent of the OS server market.
apple software is just there as an incentive to buy the hardware.
Right, the main incentive, since Apple hardware is expensive and offers poor price/performance when compared to Intel. The issue is, which non you seem to get, if someone like Novell clones the OSX interface and gives it away for free with Linux, why in the world would anyone keep buying the comparartively overpriced Mac hardware? Answer: they wouldn’t. That is Apple’s problem, not that many Linux people care about Apple anyway, they’d just rather sit back and take potshots at the author, or snicker that their freeware plan to destroy software companies is working well. At least as far as the *nix companies, Windows is a different underlying architechture, and profits and market share still going up.
Still haven’t settled on a username I see.
Actually, I have. I’ve been “a nun, he moos” for, what six months now? Ever since a name-stealing troll started to post under my name. So please use this name to reply to me, or I’ll feel free to use those nice nicknames I gave you last time you were around.
No wonder since your points are always wrong.
No, that would be you.
Uh yes. I got the figure right off of OSNEWS…
It depends on whom you ask, I guess. IDC says 38%, Gartner says 69%…maybe one is the number of servers, and the other represents dollars. Anyway, as the OSNews editors posted on that story, “these numbers are based on documented sales sales of commercial products, so they should be taken with a grain of salt, as they exclude FreeBSD and Linux servers based on freely-distributed software.”
Also, this choice quote from the article the OSNews item linked to:
Despite legal threats from SCO Group and competition from Microsoft, Gartner’s report said Linux continued to be the growth powerhouse in the operating systems server market, with a revenue increase of 57.3 percent in the first quarter of 2004.
To make a long story short, both Windows and Linux are growing in server space, but Linux is growing faster. Funny, you must have read that article, since you quoted from it, and yet you didn’t seem to get this key element…
I know you’re all depressed now that it has become apparent that SCO is going to lose their case (hey, two of their motions got denied yesterday), but we were doing just fine without your trolling.
Apple hardware is expensive and offers poor price/performance when compared to Intel.
Actually, the price/performance isn’t so bad. Don’t just look at processor speed, since they are different architectures. For some operations, such as image manipulation or video/sound editing, the Mac offer similar or better performance. The powerbooks also offer pretty good performance for the price.
Also, Macs target a different demographics. The Apple machines are beautiful objects which will appeal to buyers with more disposable income. Part of it is a status symbol. Apple is also well-like among video editors, graphic artists and sound engineers (partly for the reasons outlined above).
Whatever the reason, the simple fact remains that Apple makes money on hardware, not software. You may find this illogical, but that’s just the way it is.
not that many Linux people care about Apple anyway, they’d just rather sit back and take potshots at the author, or snicker that their freeware plan to destroy software companies is working well.
Still the conspiracy theorist, I see…
At least as far as the *nix companies, Windows is a different underlying architechture, and profits and market share still going up.
Both on Desktop and in Servers, Linux’ market share is growing faster than Windows.