Exactly. If it isnt broken, why fix it? Just improve on it. Thats basically how OS X has been, constantly evolving. This complete overhaul of windows is ridiculous.
But with OS 9 - OS X there's a few differences: 1) Apple didn't need to make sure that all the OEMs developed compatible hardware/drivers because, duh, it's the only one that made (and makes) Macs and 2) It got all the Apple developers on board with Cocoa or whatever, easy because back then the developer community was rather small.
Yea..well XP contains outdated APIs that shouldnt be used in the transition from 32 bit to 64 bit. Plus, developers were able to do things Microsoft said they shouldn't do, which created system instability. The Vista OS is fine, its developers who don't follow guidelines who mess it up.
Eggothewaffle, the difference between Vista and Mac OS9 is like that between ..OS X and Windows 95.
Sure, they both carry a GUI but look at the kernel and you will see a world of difference.
MS today have a modern OS with protected memory, support for large numbers of processors/cores (at least 32 cores are supported by design even if some versions of Windows have been given an artificial limitation), a protected filesystem and much more.
Mac OS 9 on the other hand.. Man, that was like back to the stoneage compared to any other OS being sold at the same with the exception of Windows 9x/ME.
JMM, the only stability I've seen in Vista was slowlyness.. And boy I seen number of Vista's.. I don't need it to run Crysis or whatever other games, only thing I need is to switch between browser window to music player IN LESS THEN 30 SECONDS.. And yes it's brand new, medium class laptop.
There's more to PC games than computer towers and input devices... Enter the CM Storm Sirus, the outfit's first foray into the world of gaming headsets.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
i say give us XP2
Exactly. If it isnt broken, why fix it? Just improve on it. Thats basically how OS X has been, constantly evolving. This complete overhaul of windows is ridiculous.
Yeah, because OSX has never had a complete overhaul or anything.
yeah...just give XP a visual upgrade...Vista front-end XP back-end...perfect combo
But with OS 9 - OS X there's a few differences: 1) Apple didn't need to make sure that all the OEMs developed compatible hardware/drivers because, duh, it's the only one that made (and makes) Macs and 2) It got all the Apple developers on board with Cocoa or whatever, easy because back then the developer community was rather small.
That honestly is one of the most uneducated comments I have read in a while.
Yea..well XP contains outdated APIs that shouldnt be used in the transition from 32 bit to 64 bit. Plus, developers were able to do things Microsoft said they shouldn't do, which created system instability. The Vista OS is fine, its developers who don't follow guidelines who mess it up.
Eggothewaffle, the difference between Vista and Mac OS9 is like that between ..OS X and Windows 95.
Sure, they both carry a GUI but look at the kernel and you will see a world of difference.
MS today have a modern OS with protected memory, support for large numbers of processors/cores (at least 32 cores are supported by design even if some versions of Windows have been given an artificial limitation), a protected filesystem and much more.
Mac OS 9 on the other hand.. Man, that was like back to the stoneage compared to any other OS being sold at the same with the exception of Windows 9x/ME.
JMM, the only stability I've seen in Vista was slowlyness.. And boy I seen number of Vista's..
I don't need it to run Crysis or whatever other games, only thing I need is to switch between browser window to music player IN LESS THEN 30 SECONDS.. And yes it's brand new, medium class laptop.
@dzhiurgis
That is a lie.