No the parent's position was that only chumps sell hardware and Microsoft know it. Microsoft are selling hardware, if it's part of some other strategy, like selling more software then so be it. The fact remains they are still selling hardware. They have not defined a standard which would yield an easy to make XBOX compatible have they? No, they are defining and making the hardware. No one else but MS can make an XBOX. Just like a Mac really.
Don't get me wrong I love the original XBOX, and I don't often say that about something MS makes. This, however, is stupid. If I wanted a piece of kit to upgrade and tinker with, I'd get a PC!
The beauty of the console is that if it says "XBOX" on the cover then I know it will run on my XBOX.
I don't have to answer questions like "do I have enough disk space?" "Do I have the right graphics card?" "Do I have the right optical drive" etc.
Drop a game in and play.
Several versions over the next five years? It's a recipe for disaster.
If you're going to upgrade it significantly then please - call it something else!
agreed - the Charlton Heston bit was anti good taste but the rest of the doco was pretty interesting, thought provoking and more balanced than some like to suggest...
I'm not sure "Bowling for Columbine" was simply "anti-gun". I seem to remember that it went a little deeper than that. If I remember correctly the movie asked why the per capita gun-related murders in the U.S. were higher than Canada even though the per-capita gun ownership was lower.
Something like that. While it was a gun related documentary I don't think it was imply "anti-gun".
Anyway, no such controversy with the penguin movie - it's pro penguin alright.
When computers were different
on
10 Technologies MIA
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I really miss the days when a new computer release was really that. In the good old days before PC homogenization we used to get new and interesting computers released every month it seemed. I know, I know the PC industry had to mature and standards were required blah blah.
If creating universal binaries is as easy as it seems why not just "add" Intel processors into the mix.
PPC G5s, Multi core whatever for desktops and Intel chips with the "performance per watt" required for Laptops.
Why doesn't Apple just state that they may use either Intel or PPC as best fits a given box?
I am of course basing this question on the assumption that it is only a minimal amount of work to create a Universal binary. This IS what apple is asserting.
Why not take advantage of the fact that sometimes PPC will be better and sometimes Intel will be better for a given task. They've been taking the effort to keep OSX developed for both platforms, why not continue with that ideal.
Then there would be no need for people to consider PPC "obsolete" and developers will just move over to developing Universal binaries.
If Mac users were perfectly honest they would admit that they tolerated the slower performance because the OS was so great. So "yes" you buy a mac for the OS then. Only now your Doom 3 frame rate won't suck.
Why does this have to be an "all or nothing" transition. If binaries can be delivered with both x86 and PPC code and run on either processor then why doesn't Apple keep it's options open? Apple could continue to build the x86 and PPC versions and then they would have the option of delivering systems based on whatever provided the best performance.
What if IBM invent some breakthrough technology that allows them to smash the 3,4 or 5 GHZ barrier? Apple could continue with PPC as the top of their line.
Apple have been very smart in maintaining the Intel codebase - why not continue to keep the options open?
If the transition is as easy as Steve says then why not continue to support that flexibility?
Finally it is clear to people who have been around for a while that Apple created the template from which almost all laptops are cut today. Check out this article that names the Powerbook 100 as the top gadget of all time.
"Hey, you reading this. You are going to die. Subtract the number 68 from your age. That's a good guess at how much time you have left, but no guarantees. What are you doing with your life between now and then? And if you have to die in the next minute, are you going to be satisfied with the way you've used your time? If not, start changing now."
Damn - that's another 20 seconds I won't get back...
Slashdot Mirror
Until the one blaming off-shoring for giving Microsoft the measles turned up.
No the parent's position was that only chumps sell hardware and Microsoft know it. Microsoft are selling hardware, if it's part of some other strategy, like selling more software then so be it. The fact remains they are still selling hardware. They have not defined a standard which would yield an easy to make XBOX compatible have they? No, they are defining and making the hardware. No one else but MS can make an XBOX. Just like a Mac really.
"M$ learned this lesson a long time ago, only chumps sell hardware."
And the XBOX would be ----ware?
Don't get me wrong I love the original XBOX, and I don't often say that about something MS makes. This, however, is stupid. If I wanted a piece of kit to upgrade and tinker with, I'd get a PC!
The beauty of the console is that if it says "XBOX" on the cover then I know it will run on my XBOX.
I don't have to answer questions like "do I have enough disk space?" "Do I have the right graphics card?" "Do I have the right optical drive" etc.
Drop a game in and play.
Several versions over the next five years? It's a recipe for disaster.
If you're going to upgrade it significantly then please - call it something else!
agreed - the Charlton Heston bit was anti good taste but the rest of the doco was pretty interesting, thought provoking and more balanced than some like to suggest...
I'm not sure "Bowling for Columbine" was simply "anti-gun". I seem to remember that it went a little deeper than that. If I remember correctly the movie asked why the per capita gun-related murders in the U.S. were higher than Canada even though the per-capita gun ownership was lower.
Something like that. While it was a gun related documentary I don't think it was imply "anti-gun".
Anyway, no such controversy with the penguin movie - it's pro penguin alright.
I really miss the days when a new computer release was really that. In the good old days before PC homogenization we used to get new and interesting computers released every month it seemed. I know, I know the PC industry had to mature and standards were required blah blah.
It was fun though...
At least for the first three just get of Windows and IE you can have your Internet back!
You are right. Not once did Steve Jobs promise "cheaper" macs as a reason for moving to Intel - just cooler (style and temperature :-)) ones.
Why the switch at all I wonder?
If creating universal binaries is as easy as it seems why not just "add" Intel processors into the mix.
PPC G5s, Multi core whatever for desktops and Intel chips with the "performance per watt" required for Laptops.
Why doesn't Apple just state that they may use either Intel or PPC as best fits a given box?
I am of course basing this question on the assumption that it is only a minimal amount of work to create a Universal binary. This IS what apple is asserting.
Why not take advantage of the fact that sometimes PPC will be better and sometimes Intel will be better for a given task. They've been taking the effort to keep OSX developed for both platforms, why not continue with that ideal.
Then there would be no need for people to consider PPC "obsolete" and developers will just move over to developing Universal binaries.
Some people are so good at using the ATM that THEY are ATM machines.
"the record industry has enthusiastically embraced the new legal download services ... and now we're beginning to reap the rewards"
More like:
"the record industry was lead by the balls kicking and screaming into download services...and now we're beginning to rape the rewards"
"i thought the era of the dickheads is over..
i was wrong.. they reside in the USA"
Geez man it was a joke.
I'm sure Indians make great guitarists or programmers or whatever they wish to set their minds to...
This reminds me of the "programmer's days are numbered" stories - turns out they just got outsourced to India...
Noooooooooooooooooo! (Apparently)
Yes, apparently.
"Of course, I'm posting this from a G3, so what would I know." ...how to get good value out of a computer purchase apparently...
If Mac users were perfectly honest they would admit that they tolerated the slower performance because the OS was so great. So "yes" you buy a mac for the OS then. Only now your Doom 3 frame rate won't suck.
Why does this have to be an "all or nothing" transition. If binaries can be delivered with both x86 and PPC code and run on either processor then why doesn't Apple keep it's options open? Apple could continue to build the x86 and PPC versions and then they would have the option of delivering systems based on whatever provided the best performance.
What if IBM invent some breakthrough technology that allows them to smash the 3,4 or 5 GHZ barrier? Apple could continue with PPC as the top of their line.
Apple have been very smart in maintaining the Intel codebase - why not continue to keep the options open?
If the transition is as easy as Steve says then why not continue to support that flexibility?
Hmmmm, most people who buy a Mac because it's Christmas would say "what's an x86?"
How about a virus-free OS with a GUI that doesn't suck. THAT's a startling new capability for x86.
Check out these
% 20Dell%20Wireless.htm
c net
e _top_100_gad_1.html
http://www.notesys.com/Copies/CNET%207Sep00%20IBM
Dell and IBM were duking it out for for honors of first Windows laptop with wireless a year after Apple had already offered it.
I'm not sure whether Apple make their own firewire controllers but they DID invent the technology:
http://news.com.com/2100-1040-271986.html?legacy=
Finally it is clear to people who have been around for a while that Apple created the template from which almost all laptops are cut today. Check out this article that names the Powerbook 100 as the top gadget of all time.
http://www.mobilemagazine.com/archives/2005/03/th
Admittedly blind fanboyism is not very informative but neither is denying credit where it is due.
I can see one HUGE advantage in the performance of PC emulators. Mac OS AND the ability to run "legacy" windows apps at close to 100% speed.
Nice.
No one wants to admit that they own a Windows box - this will help distance them a bit.
Microsoft should have went further and called it "The Computer that I have to use at work because the company SOE prohibits me using My Mac"
"Hey, you reading this. You are going to die. Subtract the number 68 from your age. That's a good guess at how much time you have left, but no guarantees. What are you doing with your life between now and then? And if you have to die in the next minute, are you going to be satisfied with the way you've used your time? If not, start changing now."
Damn - that's another 20 seconds I won't get back...