unlike windows, the os x kernel is open source and quite a bit of the rest of it is based on open source software (i.e. apache). the rest of os x can also be modified in quite a few ways and techniques on how to do this are available in many places including apple developer documentation. earlier versions of mac os were also easily extended and enhanced. claiming apple litigates against those who extend the os is ludicrous.

Apache is an open-source webserver that doesn't have a lot to do with OSX, or Apple. You can get it for any flavor of UNIX or MS Windows you wish. Many operating systems have packaged open-source or free tools as a part of what ships; this isn't original.

You might want to read up on what parts of OSX are open and what parts aren't. It matters. I wish OSX was the great white hope of open systems, but it's not, and trying to sell it on that basis strikes me as naive.

Apple has a long history of litigating against anyone that touches certain aspects of its IP. But don't take my word for it. Look into it for yourself.

Really, I don't feel like anything I said was particularly strong, and your objection to anything that doesn't praise Apple to the stars strikes me as more than a little fanboy-ish.

Lecturing: strive to find some balance in your analysis. I like to think of computers as akin to a toolbox full of tools. You have a hammer, a saw, a cordless drill, a corded drill. Which is "better"? Well, it just depends on what you're trying to do.

OSX's PS compositing engine is great. Microsoft's Visual Studio.NET is the best programming environment I've ever used, by far, and folks I respect argue it's the best that's ever been made. It's possible to praise the merits of both platforms without too much cognitive dissonance. Similarly, it's possible to damn what sucks about each without throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Some folks still haven't gotten over how Microsoft and Apple baldly ripped off Xerox. Exaggeration? Have a look and decide for yourself ....

-KF

my point was that out of the box, os x includes a lot of open source software and windows does not.i'm not trying to sell os x at all. my contention is that you said apple does not like and may sue if someone modifies the os. this is incorrect; they actively encourage its enhancement and provide information on how to accomplish that, with both software or hardware. please cite a case where they sued someone for enhancing the operating system. however, if someone does infringe upon their intellectual property they probably will sue; this is not really unique to apple.this is not about praising apple. what you claimed about apple forbidding enhancing the operating system was incorrect.exactly. i use macintosh, windows and unix machines daily. everything has its advantanges and disadvantages.not to nitpick, but os x's compositing engine is based on pdf, not postscript.it was not stolen; xerox received apple stock in exchange for touring parc and later using the ideas. xerox was not interested in marketing those ideas. furthermore, there is a significant difference between the xerox parc work and the original macintosh - apple modified and added a lot, and some of it dates back to before the xerox visit.

You've contended that twice, now. And where exactly did I say that? Did I say anything that even approximates what you're contending I said? There's only a few messages from me to sort through -- is your axe-grinding maybe a little misplaced?

Your faux-correction regarding PDF is interesting. Here's another opportunity to learn something new, this time about PDF's relationship to PS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pdf

FWIW, I have two Mac G4s running panther set up alongside nine WinXP, Win2000, and Win2003 boxes.

-KF

rereading, in post #119 you said that many parts of os x are not open for modification and that apple keeps a proprietary lock on their hardware and protects it via litigation. i disagree with this claim, but i did misinterpret that they litigate against os mods. apple actively encourages software and hardware add-ons, but they will protect their intellectual property just like any other company. i never said they weren't related, just that they are not the same. the page you cite confirms this. pdf was chosen over nextstep/openstep's use of display postscript partly due to licensing issues with dps.

Over on the Adobe forums on the Adobe web site, it seems that Adobe will not introduce a Universal Binary version until the next release of Photoshop.

Healthy debate is fine, please keep it civil.

And I do hope everyone settles the debate soon as I am still shopping. I am sure a consensus is right around the corner ;)

Easy solution, just buy everything. Works for me. :)

I couldn't decide between a monster laptop with a 17" display or an ultralight fujitsu tablet for the plane. Three months after starting the process I find myself with both. Funny how that happens.

Which one do you use most?

Check out Walter Mossberg's "Personal Technology" column in today's Wall Street Journal. He says it works. For the software he tried, the added processor speed offsets the overhead of translating PowerPC code, so as more apps get fixed up for the Intel instruction set it will get faster.

Mossberg is useless, as are his "reviews". For a REAL review check out this one:

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardw...-coreduo.ars/6

Pretty conclusive benchmarks, when he claims the dual core offsets Rosetta he is downright wrong. I'm sure it doesn't make much difference on a really old app, but in the kind of stuff people really use day to day it will most certainly be much slower.

I agree that photoshop is probably painful with Rosetta, but the ars benchmarks are deeply flawed. The intel iMac had 512 MB of RAM, and the G5 had 1GB. The PowerMac had 4.5GB RAM. I'd take those benchmarks with a grain of salt.

Of course, Mossberg's review addresses the photoshop problem:
"There are a couple of caveats about our results. We tested only common consumer software and tasks, not heavy-duty or professional applications, like Adobe Photoshop, or professional music and video programs, which tend to stress the processor. Some of these nonconsumer products won't work right until they are rewritten."

His Rosetta tests were:
"Microsoft Office, Adobe Reader, the Firefox Web browser, Skype, Google Earth, Quicken, the Eudora email program, Doom 3, Kodak EasyShare and others -- none of which had been rewritten. All launched quickly and ran smoothly and well."
It doesn't surprise me a bit that there's no slowdown with those apps (except Doom), because none of them are anywhere near CPU-bound.

Awww....

I thought Apple had replaced their entire notebook line with the Intel machines. Is it really only available in a 15 inch version?? My wife wants to replace her 15 inch Powerbook with something smaller. I was going to get a 12 inch Intel Mac for her until I found out they apparently dont exist. :( Has anyone heard if they are coming out with other models and when? I migth have to get either a Powerbook or a small windows machine for her.

The 12" iBook and PowerBook are supposed to be replaced with 13" widescreen models (single core for the iBook and dual for the MacPower).

Also, the 15" MacPower will get a new thinner case shortly. And I expect the 17" will also get a new case when it goes to Intel power.