On Oct 14, 2004, at 10:02 PM, Shawn King wrote: > That "kid blogger" is has been a well known (if not necessarily well > respected) reporter for Wired.com for years. > He's made a career out of making Mac users look silly. Aha! I didn't make the connection till now. This is the same guy that a month or so ago reported on the "revolutionary" QuickTransit software from Transitive Corp. He didn't get the facts straight on that one either, citing pie in the sky ideas about software applications written for one platform running on any other, without any modifications to the underlying program. You should've seen the Mac sites jump on that one - VirtualPC was suddenly a thing of the past on MacObserver and several others. When I checked with Transitive ( http://www.transitive.com/products.htm#p2 ), they're supporting only architecture translating, not environment translating. It only does UNIX to UNIX. This doesn't mean that Linux will instantly be able to run windows graphical apps or OS X graphical apps, only console or X11 apps that are compiled for PowerPC or MIPS. Windows machines won't be able to run OS X graphical apps without a copy of Aqua and all the Cocoa/Carbon/whatever layers as well. OS X systems won't be able to run Windows graphical applications without the help of some win32 libraries and the Windows display technology. I recall I emailed him about his reporting inaccuracies, or "bending" of the facts, on that one and got a senseless response too. -- Chris