<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is this what Jobs is after?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kuniform.org/2005/01/13/is-this-what-jobs-is-after/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kuniform.org/2005/01/13/is-this-what-jobs-is-after/</link>
	<description>Jason Kunesh's design blog.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Diego Navarro</title>
		<link>http://kuniform.org/2005/01/13/is-this-what-jobs-is-after/#comment-105</link>
		<dc:creator>Diego Navarro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=68#comment-105</guid>
		<description>"Sidegrade". Now, there's a name for the concept!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Sidegrade&#8221;. Now, there&#8217;s a name for the concept!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joeri</title>
		<link>http://kuniform.org/2005/01/13/is-this-what-jobs-is-after/#comment-104</link>
		<dc:creator>Joeri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:29:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=68#comment-104</guid>
		<description>Diego, excellent point. I've been using a 1ghz pIII with 256 megs of ram as my main workhorse for a while now, and I don't need a faster PC, not even for java development or photoshopping freshly scanned full page pictures. Ofcourse, matters would be different if I had to do those things all day long. But since I don't, a few seconds wait here and there just does not matter.

The way I see it, if you're an average home user, only gaming and fancy video editing still requires you to upgrade beyond the kind of specs the mini provides. And since I'm not a gamer and I don't own a DV camera, that's why I'll be ordering a mini myself. I want to sidegrade to something that works "smoother", not faster.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Diego, excellent point. I&#8217;ve been using a 1ghz pIII with 256 megs of ram as my main workhorse for a while now, and I don&#8217;t need a faster PC, not even for java development or photoshopping freshly scanned full page pictures. Ofcourse, matters would be different if I had to do those things all day long. But since I don&#8217;t, a few seconds wait here and there just does not matter.</p>
<p>The way I see it, if you&#8217;re an average home user, only gaming and fancy video editing still requires you to upgrade beyond the kind of specs the mini provides. And since I&#8217;m not a gamer and I don&#8217;t own a DV camera, that&#8217;s why I&#8217;ll be ordering a mini myself. I want to sidegrade to something that works &#8220;smoother&#8221;, not faster.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Diego Navarro</title>
		<link>http://kuniform.org/2005/01/13/is-this-what-jobs-is-after/#comment-103</link>
		<dc:creator>Diego Navarro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2005 19:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=68#comment-103</guid>
		<description>Well, yes, but what about the Mac mini?

Remember, most people don't read specs! The Mac mini might be 2002ish in its innards, but it's priced around the same as the x86 line, and just watching the first bubbles rising in the geeksphere it seems a lot of people are buying it to have a Mac aroumd, buying it for newbies or even switching over entirely. 

Myself, I've been using this K6 for five years now. I frankly can't see myself caring about the processor difference between a poderoso-y-sensual AMD64 and a 2002ish G4. And I even do some numerical work in Matlab and the like. 

This smells like big waves in the desktop market. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple crossed into the double digits market share by the time Cringley is doing his 2006 predictions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, yes, but what about the Mac mini?</p>
<p>Remember, most people don&#8217;t read specs! The Mac mini might be 2002ish in its innards, but it&#8217;s priced around the same as the x86 line, and just watching the first bubbles rising in the geeksphere it seems a lot of people are buying it to have a Mac aroumd, buying it for newbies or even switching over entirely.</p>
<p>Myself, I&#8217;ve been using this K6 for five years now. I frankly can&#8217;t see myself caring about the processor difference between a poderoso-y-sensual <span class="caps">AMD64</span> and a 2002ish G4. And I even do some numerical work in Matlab and the like.</p>
<p>This smells like big waves in the desktop market. I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised if Apple crossed into the double digits market share by the time Cringley is doing his 2006 predictions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
