And just to show we're not a bunch of drudges -- and to prove there are actual living and breathing human beings involved in the Save XP campaign -- how about uploading your own Save XP video plea to the InfoWorld "Save XP" section of FaceBook? We'll show off the funniest, most creative appeals to save XP on our home page.Let your opinion be seen and heard, show Microsoft how serious you are.
A lot of questions come to mind, where does this leave the Apple-Intel alliance? what product could this low-POWER go into?Apple has acquired a fabless semiconductor company, PA Semi, according to a report at Forbes.com.
PA Semi designs energy efficient processors based on the Power architecture that Apple used in its Macintosh computers for many years before adopting Intel's x86 chips.
An explanation: as a public, for-profit company, Red Hat must create products and technologies with an eye on the bottom line, and with desktops this is much harder to do than with servers. The desktop market suffers from having one dominant vendor, and some people still perceive that today’s Linux desktops simply don’t provide a practical alternative. Of course, a growing number of technically savvy users and companies have discovered that today’s Linux desktop is indeed a practical alternative. Nevertheless, building a sustainable business around the Linux desktop is tough, and history is littered with example efforts that have either failed outright, are stalled or are run as charities. But there’s good news too. Technical developments that have become available over the past year or two are accelerating the spread of the Linux Desktop.What the hell is wrong with those people! They are simply giving up? Or is it all about the bottom-line after all! I hope this doesn't pull the plug on Fedora, then again Fedora is community driven.. Pray!
Mac: In both the laptop and desktop showdowns, Apple's computers were the winners. Oddly, the big difference didn't come in our user ratings, where we expected the famously friendly Mac interface to shine.People wonder why I've caught the love bug, iLove Macs.
Our respondents liked the look and feel of both operating systems but had a slight preference toward OS X. In our speed trials, however, Leopard OS trounced Vista in all-important tasks such as boot-up, shutdown, and program launch times. We even tested Vista on the Macs using Apple's platform-switching Boot Camp software--and found that both Apple computers ran Vista faster than our PCs did.
PC: Simply put, Vista proved to be a more sluggish operating system than Leopard. Our PCs installed some software faster, but in general, they were slower in our time trials. Plus, both PCs showed weaker performance on third-party benchmarks than the Macs.
Our biggest surprise, however, was that PCs were not the relative bargains we expected them to be. The Asus M51sr costs the same as a MacBook, while the Gateway One actually costs $300 more than an iMac. That means that for the price of the Gateway, you could buy an iMac, boost its hard drive to match the Gateway's, purchase a copy of Vista to boot--and still save $100.
The consumer market is taking longer to develop, he said Wednesday. "The market for the desktop for the next three to five years is mainly enterprise-related," he said.Say it isn't so! I could of sworn it was otherwise with all "Your Linux is ready" ads.
"No matter how hard Microsoft works to persuade people to embrace Vista, some just can't be wowed. They complain about Vista's hefty hardware requirements, its less-than-peppy performance, occasional incompatibility with other programs and devices and frequent, irritating security pop-up windows."
"The fact is, Vista is just not designed to work well on the vast majority of ultraportable computers, and XP flies in comparison. Instead of taking XP to end of life, Microsoft needs to consider XP as a core mobile platform going forward while keeping Windows Mobile reserved for phone-based devices that are pocketable or smaller."
"Hey Microsoft, Vista is good -- for increasing OSX & Linux installs.I can't believe that with all the time, effort & money invested in Vista, all you've managed to produce is an OS that is more bloated, insecure & unstable than XP.Face the facts, OSX & Linux are the new desktop frontiers.Your monopolistic rein is nearing its end."
"This is a large part of the reason [why] Windows Vista delivered primarily incremental improvements," they said. In turn, that became one of the reasons why businesses pushed back Vista deployment plans. "Most users do not understand the benefits of Windows Vista or do not see Vista as being better enough than Windows XP to make incurring the cost and pain of migration worthwhile."
"Apple introduced its iPhone running OS X, but Microsoft requires a different product on handhelds because Windows Vista is too large, which makes application development, support, and the user experience all more difficult," said Silver and MacDonald.
"Windows as we know it must be replaced," they said in their presentation.I always thought that Microsoft should do as Apple and abandon its original OS architecture and switch to a UNIX/UNIX-like based kernel.
