Neowin.net

"An ongoing debate has been raging since the G5's announcement which asks that we define the G5 as either a "desktop" or "workstation" class computer". Editorial contributor Harry Rider believes that the fact that such a debate exists at all, is a major detractor to the advancement this new computer brings, and that the computer is not either/or, but instead, both a desktop AND workstation.

Since the introduction of Apple's G5, there has been a debate as to whether or not this new computer is in fact a "desktop" or "workstation" class computer. The argument by itself is a ridiculous one, as these titles are solely determined by the manor in which an individual uses the computer. Trying to differentiate between the two terms is a lesson in futility. Dictionary.com defines "workstation" as such: workstation n: a desktop computer that is conventionally considered to be more powerful than a microcomputer. If that definition isn't obscure, I don't know what is!

The fact that the debate exists at all, is a testament to the tenacity of those individuals who strive to to discredit Apple's retail efforts at every turn. The argument goes like this. If the G5 is regarded as "workstation", then Apple's "desktop" is then relegated to the company's G4 lineup. As we all know, the G4 is regarded by the masses (albeit inappropriately) as "massively underpowered" when compared to its x86 competition. If then the G4 is Apple's real "desktop" then the speed crown Apple took back with the G5 is supposedly lost.

News source: OS-News

Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Calif., described the original moratorium as "something of an experiment" and declared it a success. Keeping Internet access tax-free will give more people access, he said.

"It's just a little bit too expensive for a lot of people," Cox said. "A nick here, and a little bit of nickels and dimes here, would add up to a serious amount of taxation for most people."

The House on Wednesday also passed a bill that would cut taxes $12.7 billion over the next decade. It aims at encouraging more charitable giving. The nine states who impose a communications tax on Internet connections stand to lose $80 million to $120 million a year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Several Texas Democrats opposed the bill, including Rep. Gene Green, who said Texas would lose $45 million a year in tax revenue.

"I don't need to remind my colleagues of the fiscal crisis that our states are currently finding ourselves in, including the state of Texas," Green said.

A similar Senate bill, approved by a committee and awaiting floor debate, would give states that tax Internet connections three years to phase them out and find new sources of revenue. NCSL spokesman Neal Osten said states also worry that a permanent moratorium will lead to confusion when telecommunications companies develop new technologies never contemplated by the law. When the first moratorium was introduced in 1998, he noted, cell phones were a novelty and DSL service had no consumer market.

New technologies might have to fight their way into the tax exemption.

"It's going to be a battle then to get Congress to focus," he said.

The bill does not affect sales taxes on goods purchased over the Internet. An organization of state governments plans to propose a plan next week to streamline state sales tax collections on Internet commerce.