Published on 31st May 2006 by
Originally Posted by naughty naughty Brett Thomasoff of
Originally Posted by jazzleIt seems unlikely to me.
I think it would be interesting to hear both side's official arguments why they would and wouldn't do it.
Originally Posted by LovahI didn't even read the article. The intro spooked me enough!
I love being part of the apple-minority. I don't miss anything about Windows so I don't see how any part of Windows could improve anything about OS X.
Originally Posted by neocleousTo me whats more likely then a merger is MS buying Apple if they could sort the legalities of it out. Lets be honest the whole Macs are faster then PC's etc argument is pretty redundant now that there using Intel CPU's and you can easily compare the two.
I mean if you can get XP on a Mac i'm sure it wont be long before MAC OS is on a PC assuming drivers for hard ware comes out and there is greater software support in general.
Personally I think Apple have made a mistake using Intel CPUs because their machines look very underpowered compared to a PC of similar price Apples main attraction over a PC is design and to the hardcore fan software.
Originally Posted by Firehedx17900GTXOCPro
While these two companies are fumbling around in the dark to try and imitate what the other side perfected long ago, technology continues to increase at a rapid rate. CPU speed is increasing tremendously, and HDDs are now capable of perpendicular storage (increasing both size and speed). We are moving towards an era where two gigabytes of RAM will be mainstream. That's plenty of RAM for multiple, more specific drivers, and plenty of speed to support a database file structure. Code efficiency is no longer such a requirement due to sheer horsepower, and can finally take a back seat to user efficiency.
Originally Posted by OtakuHawkwhat are you smoking, author?
hmm... let's combine the two leading OS's into one piece. no competition, no reason to improve or fix what's broken.
there's a reason market domination is bad for the consumer, it drives up prices, and reduces quality.
competition = GOOD.
Originally Posted by dliberateHmm, so the ultimate OS would then be one that is stable, fast, secure, has a mounted file systems (and allows virtual links) supports the full range of hardware and has good automatic detection for it.
Did I hear anyone say Linux? SUSE/(K)Ubuntu/Fedora Core/Mandriva all conform to those categories and they're free.
Also what's this advocation of non-optimised code? That's a frankly moronic idea. A 500bhp engine doesn't guarantee a fast car. It's only if the car can put that power on the road that it becomes fast. I don't want to spend good money on a blisteringly quick pc to find that the new M$ OS uses 75% of the resources because of lazy coding.
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
29th August 2014
© Copyright bit-tech