XP Compatibility
 

While it is true that XP is based more on the NT/2000 Kernel than the 9x kernel(grouping ME into this), and NT/2000 has had compatibility issues with some software, Microsoft is making this one of their main focus points, knowing that XP will have more of a home user presence than 2000 did, and making compatibility with existing software, especially games, one of their important goals for the XP release. However, due to the different architecture of the NT/2000/XP kernel, there will be some software that either will have to be rewritten or simply just won't work, mainly those programs that used 9x specific code to work their magic.

As far as the hardware compatibility issue, my understanding as to the "if your machine has 95 or 98 on it, don't automatically assume XP will work" statement is not that they are dropping compatibility for older hardware(note: it's reported that you can use Win2000 drivers with XP if that's all you can get for a device,) but it's rather due to the increased requirements of the XP kernel. Since it's based on NT, this comes as no real surprise, as NT has always needed a more powerful system than 9x. For example, here's the list of requirements for the XP RC1 Preview release:
-Minimum 200Mhz processor, 300Mhz recommended (Intel or AMD recommended)
-64MB RAM Minimum, 128 MB Recommended
-1.5 GB free disk space(maximum, depends on installed options)
-SVGA 800x600 or higher
-CD-ROM or DVD Drive
-Keyboard
-MS Mouse or compatible

Re: Third Party Kernals
 

As far as Linux not having any software, it does, you just aren't looking in the right places. A lot of it is server side (Apache, Oracle, DB2, Notes Backend, among others). There is also a good deal that is enduser (Word Perfect Office, StarOffice/Open Office, Kylix, etc.). Does it have a ways to go? Yep. Will it get there? I give it even odds. Will it ever take over the whole market? Probably not.

As far as OSX goes, yes it's going to be good for Apple in the long run (I think). However, it has managed to annoy a lot of long time Apple users because it is very different from the original Mac.

And as far as the G4 being faster than a P4/Athlon, it all depends on what you're doing. Just remember that a Cray is really good at floating point stuff but a P4 could beat the pants off it in integer math.

Matt who wonders why he's debating this...

Linux's software, is yes mostly on the server side, and there is other software like a basic version of AIM and a few games. But, there will never be the major applications like Adobe or 3d studio max or Maya and a bunch of other brand name apps, because they pay their developers to write the code, and they don't want their code to be copied.

At first you may think that Mac OS X is a big difference from OS 9. But I have played with it @ Comp USA and it just like the OS 9 except for the dock and a couple of other features.

Yes, you are right it depends what applications you use to determine how fast the processors go. In the G4 and the Pentium 4 they both have overclocks to allow them. In the G4 it is called the velocity engine, but I forgot what it is called on a Pentium. But if software is written for those overclocks than the app is much faster like Adobe or Media Cleaner 5. However MHz does not really mean better performance, it is just a segment of performance. You can look that up at http://www.apple.com/g4/myth/

so i can't believe i just wasted like my last 20 minutes here at work reading this thread...

i also can't believe i'm gonna join in and throw down some cents... :)

What Nate says is right on the money, when it comes to compatability, its all about the new NT/2k based kernel. Legacy devices are a pretty big ball and chain to lug around when you're trying to create something new. Microsoft feels this heavily because they are screwed if they break compatability too much. Some think that this an OS change on the scale of DOS6.2 to Win95 but i don't think so, its definitely a lot more gradual than that. The compatability modes are a pretty slick example of the lengths that they are going to to make things work.

And Matt, i disagree. I feel Linux has had its day in the sun and isn't going much farther. And what's happening with Apple is the flip coin to how Microsoft is behaving. Mac OS has been practically unchanged until os9 and when they finally changed the guts, and some complain because the classic stuff isn't there... exact same thing.

anyways, i should go finish that linux webserver and app server...

That MHz doesn't matter was part of my point. And using Apple as a source isn't all that great because they are highly unbiased.

As far as porting of apps to Linux, you bring up Maya, which has a Linux port:
http://www.videosystems.com/2001/03_..._for_linux.htm

And as far as code being copied, I'm not sure what you're talking about. There's no (legal) need to distribute source code with any program you release for Linux. It's just as illegal to distribute copies of software written for Linux as for Windows.

My opinion is that the computer OS monopoly will end in the near future. No one OS will dominant instead there will be several (Windows, MacOS, Linux, maybe some more). Choice is a good thing.

Matt

Open Source
 

Sorry Matt,
I didn't know that Maya was available for Linux (I thought it was only available for NT, Unix, and OS X)

To clarify, Linux is an open source system. So any program made for Linux can have its code modified or copied. Meaning the term "open-source" the system allows its code to be shown. Windows, Mac OS 9, Unix are all closed source system.

This is why applications on Linux are dirt cheap. It is like the drug industry. Prescription drugs are expensive in the US because their are laws protecting the mixture and the dosage of the drug. But in Canada They are much cheaper because similar drugs can be made because there, which is less stricter laws to guard the formula of drugs.

Same with Linux,
Anybody that makes an app on Linux knows that they run the risk of people copying code and calling it their own. It is one of those things that is good for the consumer but bad for business.

Re: Open Source
 

No they don't. In this you are totally and completely wrong. If you want to release an application for Linux, there's nothing making you release the source code. Absolutely nothing at all. There then is no way for anyone to modify it or redistribute it or claim it as their own. This is the exact same way it works on the Windows platform. The source code to Maya and Oracle and WordPerfect Office and DB2 is not released. You can't distribute any of those without the permission of the manufacturer. It works the same way as Windows. I don't know where you got your information from but it's just plain wrong.

Matt