Why Microsoft Should Fear Intel Macs" 539

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 14:19:07 -0700, Donald McDaniel

Excuse me? Have you actually used a GNU-Linux desktop environment? What makes you think that it isn't 'user programmable'? I've had a 'user programmable' desktop environment for *years* now.

Again, what makes you think this is not possible to do on GNU-Linux? KDE is well known for it's capabilities in this regard. I'm perfectly capable of changing any aspect of the system I want, and to affect my own personal themes should I wish to put them together.

What makes you think this cannot be accomplished on GNU-Linux? Xgl provides window transform capabilities--that is demonstrated by the 'window wobble' effect.

The Windows source code isn't for sale. One would have to buy Microsoft to get it.

No, it's called an 'extensible architecture'. Open, in relation to coding, has very specific connotations. If the source code is not available, then it's not open.

Actually, any developer is free to make additions to OS X. Indeed, much of the source code is freely available. Not only is it extensible, but much of it is also open.

No, there isn't. You were confusing 'extensible' with 'open'.

Apple's architecture is more open than Microsoft's, ironically enough.

I like haxies, they're useful in many cases.

AFAIK, we were talking about your claims of Vista being open, when compared with something like GNU-Linux or one of the BSDs. That claim *is* somewhat laughable.