Apple is staying in computers by selling iPods and music. That is what Microsoft should do, sell music to keep their computers afloat (not)! Apple can't keep up by making their own computers, so they are taking intel computers and trying to control them even though they are 99.5% the same as a PC. The sad truth is with Intel chips, Apple is becoming more like Microsoft. And Apple is still needs Microsoft. If you could not get Microsoft Office for Macs, all you could do with them is listen to music and make movies.
People will not be porting a lot of games for one simple reason. Numbers. Apple has about 2.5% of the market share. That is saying that for every 5 mac users there are 195 users of other systems, the lions share of these being Microsoft based. Not all users will buy the game either. If I develop some software and I have to decide if I want to spend millions of dollars to make it avialable to 2.5% of computer user, or if I should concentrate on the much larger percentage of people who use MS products, it is an easy choice. Even if EVERY mac users buys it, it can't compare to only getting 1 out of 10 PC users to buy it.
Hmmm seem we are beating around the bush here. Computers were built from math. They are, in fact, applied math. It is not by chance that the list of names associated with computers have many mathematicians. Pascal, Lovelace, Bryon, Dijkstra - all mathematics. Knowing math helps with computers the same way knowing physics helps with engineering. Think of it like the human body. The basic block of life is the cell, cells form tissues, the tissues from organs, then organs form systems, and the systems for us. An understanding of the basic building block makes it easier to understand things at a higher level. A doctor would have a harder time understanding how the human body works if he does not understand how a cell works.
Edison did not invent the lightbulb, he only perfected a lab curiousity so that it was feasable for everday use.
Ford did not invent the auto assembly line (Randsom E Olds did that) Ford improved upon it where he could mass produce cars and provide it to the masses at an affordable cost.
Did this guy invent something new? Probably not, but I think the people who will be using it will thank him for having it in their house.
Invetion is fine, but without application and distrubution, it is meaningless to most people.
Slashdot Mirror
Amen Brother.
Apple is staying in computers by selling iPods and music. That is what Microsoft should do, sell music to keep their computers afloat (not)! Apple can't keep up by making their own computers, so they are taking intel computers and trying to control them even though they are 99.5% the same as a PC. The sad truth is with Intel chips, Apple is becoming more like Microsoft. And Apple is still needs Microsoft. If you could not get Microsoft Office for Macs, all you could do with them is listen to music and make movies.
People will not be porting a lot of games for one simple reason. Numbers. Apple has about 2.5% of the market share. That is saying that for every 5 mac users there are 195 users of other systems, the lions share of these being Microsoft based. Not all users will buy the game either. If I develop some software and I have to decide if I want to spend millions of dollars to make it avialable to 2.5% of computer user, or if I should concentrate on the much larger percentage of people who use MS products, it is an easy choice. Even if EVERY mac users buys it, it can't compare to only getting 1 out of 10 PC users to buy it.
Amen brother amen.
Hmmm seem we are beating around the bush here. Computers were built from math. They are, in fact, applied math. It is not by chance that the list of names associated with computers have many mathematicians. Pascal, Lovelace, Bryon, Dijkstra - all mathematics. Knowing math helps with computers the same way knowing physics helps with engineering.
Think of it like the human body. The basic block of life is the cell, cells form tissues, the tissues from organs, then organs form systems, and the systems for us. An understanding of the basic building block makes it easier to understand things at a higher level. A doctor would have a harder time understanding how the human body works if he does not understand how a cell works.
Is it new, no. But does that really matter?
Edison did not invent the lightbulb, he only perfected a lab curiousity so that it was feasable for everday use.
Ford did not invent the auto assembly line (Randsom E Olds did that) Ford improved upon it where he could mass produce cars and provide it to the masses at an affordable cost.
Did this guy invent something new? Probably not, but I think the people who will be using it will thank him for having it in their house.
Invetion is fine, but without application and distrubution, it is meaningless to most people.
Another good book is The Unix and X Command Compendium Shows shell commands, and explains what they do. A very good Unix reference book.