So let me get this straight... Miguel de Icaza, a well-known person within the open source community, writes a blog post about how he's using a Mac. And that's linked to a little bit of Richard Stallman nastiness from a few years ago (Mr Stallman said that Mr de Icaza was a "traitor to the open source movement"). And it makes it onto a blog planet for KDE developers, and that generates a mention on Slashdot?
Because the man put together a thought out and reasoned case for moving to the Mac platform? And while he's at it, he points out legitimate issues with Linux and Windows.
You know, politics is often about trivialities and pettiness and how such things can become very important, or have a significant impact. Political punditry is different; it's as much about making the trivial important as it is highlighting the truly significant. Quite often, in politics as in life, what seems immediately important is actually trivial; very rarely does the reciprocal happen. Right now, I don't know if this story is interesting enough for me to wonder if it's important or trivial; I am, however, quite inclined to think it's both. What I do know is that it caught my attention. All in all, I'd have to say it's not worth the time I've spent trying to write about it.
"Man buys new computer, didn't like the one he was using!" To some, it's as important as a politician changing his or her party.
Edit: Changed the conclusion a bit. I didn't like the original one; it didn't reflect what I thought. So, once I'd figured out how to say what I wanted to say, I rewrote the conclusion. :-)