You do realize Apple can do whatever it wants? It makes it's own hardware and software afterall, they are by no means required to support ANYTHING else. So there seems to be no link between MS and Apple in that department. If MS made it's own hardware and slaved the OS to its hardware...more power to 'em, that is their decission, no one elses. And no one has the right to bash Apple, or any other company that choose a closed system. As long as a company keeps its product competitive and as good as it can be under various circumstances, then who gives a damn if it's a closed or open system?
Also, on a side note..i think Apple will actually be offering other OSes. Namely Mklinux, and MacOS X Server. And also be aware, it is NOT Apple's fault the Cloners quite making PPC mobos, there are plenty of PPC OSes out there that they could have picked up. But they wanted to make MacOS clones, and not support LinuxPPC, BeOS, etc. Can't blame Apple for the lack of hardware from other vendors. Can only blame Apple for not licensing out the ROM (which is their ROM, their choice and only their choice).
Now if you don't mind Edgy, would you reply and lay out the problems with a closed system? And/or compare and contrast Closed vs Open?
But some of the software is not. This CNet Article says that.
"...if improperly used by an application, would result in improper date readings."
"Apple's Web site says Macintosh computers can handle internally generated dates correctly all the way to the year 29,940 as long as the software running on them manages dates correctly as well."
So as long as programmers don't get stupid, and know what they should know...then, there would not and will not be a problem. So any problems encountered on a Mac are due to incompetent developers, or unaware developers (no blame can be laid on the unaware though), and MicroSoft (hehheh). So my question is, is it really a problem at all? I mean, which programs were done incorrectly and will have a problem, and does anyone use them? If they are used...well, I guess their competition could have a leg up. I wonder how many MS Mac programs are not Y2K compliant.
Question 2: What about Winhoes and other OSes? How y2k comp. are they and are their apps y2k comp. too? Has anyone seen a study or some work looking at all the OSes out there and their compatability with a new millenium (or the end of this one actually)? And is the report WinCentric or OS-nuetral (and actually objective)? How does Linux and *BSD stand? Or will they fall victim?
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize Apple can do whatever it wants?
It makes it's own hardware and software afterall, they are by no means required to support ANYTHING else. So there seems to be no link between MS and Apple in that department. If MS made it's own hardware and slaved the OS to its hardware...more power to 'em, that is their decission, no one elses. And no one has the right to bash Apple, or any other company that choose a closed system.
As long as a company keeps its product competitive and as good as it can be under various circumstances, then who gives a damn if it's a closed or open system?
Also, on a side note..i think Apple will actually be offering other OSes. Namely Mklinux, and MacOS X Server.
And also be aware, it is NOT Apple's fault the Cloners quite making PPC mobos, there are plenty of PPC OSes out there that they could have picked up. But they wanted to make MacOS clones, and not support LinuxPPC, BeOS, etc. Can't blame Apple for the lack of hardware from other vendors. Can only blame Apple for not licensing out the ROM (which is their ROM, their choice and only their choice).
Now if you don't mind Edgy, would you reply and lay out the problems with a closed system? And/or compare and contrast Closed vs Open?
But some of the software is not. This CNet Article says that.
"...if improperly used by an application, would result in improper date readings."
"Apple's Web site says Macintosh computers can handle internally generated dates correctly all the way to the year 29,940 as long as the software running on them manages dates correctly as well."
So as long as programmers don't get stupid, and know what they should know...then, there would not and will not be a problem. So any problems encountered on a Mac are due to incompetent developers, or unaware developers (no blame can be laid on the unaware though), and MicroSoft (hehheh). So my question is, is it really a problem at all? I mean, which programs were done incorrectly and will have a problem, and does anyone use them? If they are used...well, I guess their competition could have a leg up.
I wonder how many MS Mac programs are not Y2K compliant.
Question 2: What about Winhoes and other OSes? How y2k comp. are they and are their apps y2k comp. too? Has anyone seen a study or some work looking at all the OSes out there and their compatability with a new millenium (or the end of this one actually)?
And is the report WinCentric or OS-nuetral (and actually objective)?
How does Linux and *BSD stand? Or will they fall victim?