We all felt the same way when we purchased G5 mac-pro's and they switched to intel a couple of years later. The nice thing is that it took a solid 2-3 years before powerpc was no longer viable after the switch. If you can get 4-5 years out of your current macbook pro before 'having' to switch, that is a pretty solid investment; especially since you can still run windows/linux/etc on the current hardware. I can see the 'switch' to ARM taking a bit longer this time around mainly because there are a lot of workloads that have been customized for a amd-64 architecture. The performance metrics for high-volume operations (think mac-pro stuff) haven't been revealed, and there is no telling how well the initial runs of A13ZXYA12 are going to perform in the 'pro' workspace. I am pretty trusting of apple though. The A12X processor is a beast and if they can scale out the cores, and tune the OS/Software for it, it might be a great transition.

This is absolutely correct. There are meta elements you can add to the html payload which will force IE8 to run with specific rendering rules. However, the *rendering* of the content isn't the biggest problem.... A *LOT* of internal applications were written without sandboxing and security in mind. So, in the early days of javascript/dhtml, it was the wild wild west, and bad code simply will not work. The security semantics of iframes also changed along the way. ... and then there is the white elephant in the room.... ActiveX/OCX's in the browser ... which enabled vb6 developers to get 'fat client' functionality running in a browser. In this case, many of the legacy control toolkits are marginally functional on Windows7. The bottom line is that IE6, VB6 and IIS made it VERY easy for devs to develop solutions *quickly* for the enterprise. Now, they are reaping the harvest of bad security decisions, bad coding, etc...

My experience differs. My employer does on-campus interviews at around 50 schools nationwide, and over 70% of the potential recruits were equipped with macs.... according to the web logs from a site they were required to visit individually.... Our public web site has seen a marked increase in 'mac' traffic as well.... averaging around 10%, up from 3% a couple of years ago.

1. develop cool single player game
2. add a pvp/arena/ranking system so when the user finishes the single player game, they keep coming back to zerg the n00bz.
3. profit!

Welcome to slashdot....

Statement: KHTML did Apple a favor by releasing the code. Response: No, they didn't. It is LGPL licensed. Statement: They should be required to submit their changes back as per the LGPL license. Response: They are providing their changes. Statement: It isn't easy to apply their changes to the originally source code. Response: But the LGPL doesn't require the contributions to be in a 'ready to use' format. Statement: But they should have given us patch logs so we can commit the changes equally. Response: Apple isn't obligated to give you access to their patch logs, only the changes. Statement: But they should have 'in the spirit of community'. Response: LOL. So, the GPL isn't just a binding agreement now, but a moral mandate? The bottom line is that Apple has fullfilled all their legal obligations to the KHTML community .. and then some. My god, GPL advocates are annoying. Even when people comply fully with the GPL they are complaining about 'community' and 'spirit'. To summarize: Apple is 'mean' because they aren't making the KHTML developer's lives easy, even if they have fullfilled all their legal obligations.