why not OS X?

[Stefan Jeglinski]

>I have a YDL box on an old machine that can't run OS X (although I 
>hear that X Post Facto might soon fix the 6400/6500 OS X 
>incompatibilities :) ).

LOL :-) With my experience so far with OSX, I can now see why Jobs et 
al. made the (then unpopular) decision to not allow OSX to run on 603 
machines. It would simply run so slow on a 603 that you'd think it 
was frozen and you'd reboot over and over in wonderment.

What bugs me, and what I must simply echo as a similar example to 
what others have posted here: YDL 2.2 on my 603ev 6500/300 is pretty 
much on par with my G4 dual 533 on OSX (and exceeds it at times!), 
other things equal (taking into account the video card difference for 
example). For this to be true, OSX must simply be broken for most 
values of broken (call it eye candy or whatever).

OTOH, OSX has its place and I'm not about to trash-talk it either. I 
just last week talked (with no small trepidation) a Wintel laptop 
user into buying the new iBook. I'm helping her with the Mac/UNIX 
nuances, and so far we haven't had to boot into OS9 once. She is 
simply delighted and I couldn't be happier for her. It's still pretty 
slow IMHO but she doesn't know any better since her looooong Windows 
experience was quite worse.

With Steve at the helm, Apple's Macintosh will always corner itself 
into the niche market, just as they pretty much always have from the 
start. But they know that niche better than anyone, and can sell to 
it. Even I'm thinking of buying my first Mac (made by Apple) since 
1994, but as a threat to Linux, OSX is still quite a joke except in 
the home and SOHO arena. Perhaps later this will change, but I'm 
afraid Linux and hardware will continue to evolve faster than Apple, 
as per tradition.


Stefan Jeglinski