When Apple shops see absolute newbie trying to buy games and asking for machine specs won't help, they ask a simple question: "Is your Macbook black or white?". If guy answers "White", they grab the heavy 3d titles from his hands saying "It won't work".
You know why? Macbook Pro (black) has a real GPU made by either NVidia or ATI and ordinary Macbook (now changed) has Intel GMA X3100 which really deserves the invented name "crapset". Thank God Apple finally moved to NVidia in new generation.
If someone tells a 1080P (or even 4K, who knows?) next generation game console "features" Intel graphics, you better tell that story.
Intel lacks decades of expertise. Only way to make a decent graphics chipset is acquiring NVidia, fire entire team/developers responsible for Intel GMA scandal and ship them as "Nvidia, by Intel" brand.
Don't fall to their spec pages, read the real life experience of gamers or even Desktop users. nanometer isn't everything especially for a game console.
So what will happen to billions of dollars, millions of engineering work to produce that great Cell broadband engine? Will it be (ab)used for "upscaling" features which are soon to be obsolete thanks to the rise of real HD?
I am glad Toshiba is in Cell board and they make use of the chip in right ways (adding to laptop etc.)
If Intel designs any kind of GPU, that game console and the maker is destined to certain death.
I had chance (!) to use all 3 Intel chipsets for graphics in weeks and immediately cancelled my plans to upgrade aging Mac Mini G4 to Intel because it has that i950 "crapset".
Both NVidia and ATI are good on what they do with years of expertise and know-how. They also know what the real life, gaming is thanks to their huge communities which brings up the issues which Intel or no other company can figure before it happens.
If they abandon their Cell (which they waste with that mem) for Intel CPU, it would be a huge mistake too. CPU isn't the problem, developers who are in still learning process of massive multi processing methods and developer tools are the problem.
I am really glad you debunked the story. Not like Sony wouldn't make such amazingly stupid mistakes...
No, only "Word 6" was directly converted from Windows (as a test) and it was a disaster on Mac scene.
Office 08 for Mac is built on XCode and they even had same problems as open source people because of a way more strict gcc coming with Xcode 3. It was a funny read to see MS struggling with GNU software, thanks to Apple;)
If you ignore the "I hate M$" comments, their Office blog is really interesting sometimes. http://blogs.msdn.com/macmojo/
Some screenshots there tells me it is a pure Cocoa application.
Does ZFS people work on how to make it perfectly OS X safe with every single HFS+ feature as ".app package", "hidden finder flags" and even "resources"?
I am sure some people confuses OSX with FreeBSD. No, Mac users and even professionals need such features which HFS+ currently provides.
Issue with ZFS is it comes from Sun/Solaris land which really doesn't care about such "lame end user" things. If they demo ZFS perfectly working as native HFS+ on OS X, things could really change. At least for Snow Leopard. By everything, I mean even "Change file type/creator", "change icon", "add Finder flags". That may sound lame but it is real life, DTP people use filetype/creator per file very extensively. Even users want a certain MKV to open with VLC and other with mplayer.
On Windows land, MS is stuck with NTFS emulating MS-DOS junk (8.3 OS parts etc.) so it is beyond hopeless.
It needs end user input, developers who take such things serious and admit there are some operating systems really want backwards compatibility. I speak about Apple which still has "Install MacOS9 drivers" in Leopard disk utility erase and adds a HFS wrapper just to tell the disk is HFS+.
But that edition I mention has potential to run way more apps than the "Pro" version because of reduced system overhead/frameworks/services.
What they try to do is mainframe like artificial process limiting via software. I still hope it is a misunderstanding. It really beats the whole "640K" thing/rumour. If that is the company who controls 90%+ of Desktop market, we really have a problem.
How many editions does OS X have? 2. How many editions does Redhat Enterprise, Suse, AIX has? 1
I can ship a "Ilgaz Linux" right away and it wouldn't be Linux or Linus'es fault. It is pure open source and everyone is free to package and ship their own Linux. In case of Windows, even kernels are different.
If Windows 7 is really "the best Windows MS shipped" and fixes the issues of Windows while not torturing user, I would be plain sad for the engineering/coding work wasted by MS suits/accountants/managers.
It looks like Vista. Everyone liked the promises of Vista and right before it shipped, such BS stuff like "editions", "UAC" added.
That "Only 3 apps will run" has the potential of "640K is enough", trust me. Even the worst troll/evil PR company on planet couldn't come up with that.
OS X Server edition is really for servers, optimised for them in every aspect down to how memory is managed. On Windows case, Home version has features which not just admins but a bit technical users may use from time to time. That is why people are driven to pirate Pro version while they have perfectly working and legal Windows Home.
If OS X was like Windows, OS X "home edition" would lack "Time Machine" backup functionality and would ask for Ultimate edition. I also heard they made a good invention of using a cheap usb key,whatever to accelerate systems boot but it is only existing in Ultimate version. Imagine you find a way to fix the number 1 issue of Windows, slow boot and you only give it to "Ultimate" edition users who already has very high end hardware which already fixes it.
What I am saying is, it could be really possible for them as Vista+ only supports NTFS to install and NTFS has "streams" support which can be used as metadata.
The problem is, you are dealing with a company who still insists using 8.3 MSDOS names even on Windows Vista and 7. Expecting them to use something like metadata which is absolutely possible is asking for impossible. I joked about it but let me be clear, if a miracle happens and MS starts to use their own metadata zone... All current rootkit detectors will go nuts! It is because only rootkit developers found a way to use that stale feature.
If you have used OS/2 you know know how advanced "metadata" features are. You can even configure a browser behaviour on a basic, saved web link file. The filesystem is in fact can be called NTFS 1.0 (it is HPFS). They have a way more complex thing in hand and they use it like MS DOS. So there is no "Internet Explorer.exe" and it is still called "iexplore.exe".
It is because MS never used "metadata" stuff in NTFS which exists for years. Apple's "FAT binary" is a good solution since User doesn't see "G4.exe, G5.exe, i386.exe" in their own respective directories.
Also thanks to HFS+ and.app architecture, Apple can easily separate data and code without any ugly look. For apps, there is one data directory (icons, languages, movies) and it will be used regardless of the CPU. Lets say, IE does have its icons, menus in.exe file itself, not in "IE resources". That is how MS had a nice Internet Explorer.app on MacOS/OS X which you can drag to Trash.
Want to see how it looks on NTFS which somehow, insanely trying to look like MS DOS? If you have Apple Quicktime or Safari installed, just look at their directories in "Program Files". Man it is really ugly and confusing.
If MS was really in revolution, they would have started to use NTFS features such as "streams" but of course, that feature is reserved to DOSkit authors now:)
Apple doesn't have problem with people still preferring to use Tiger, a lot of people do BTW and that is why iTools/iWork 08 (until 09) can be installed to Tiger adding their own frameworks and it keeps getting Quicktime/Security updates.
Apple doesn't start a "Mojave experiment" just to prove people that they are hallucinating. In fact, they do everything to keep low Mhz CPU people away from Leopard.
Besides trying to justify their move (a big move) to Intel for portable future, they never said anything bad against G5. G5 was and even still is a great CPU but it can't fit to portable and Apple thinks the future is portable (which already proved right). Of course, a 2008 Xeon will beat G5, I am not saying otherwise.
In fact, if you ask me, it should be installed to anything including Virtual machines. It is the "bare" XP. Nothing else and it works perfectly. If netbook people insist on running Windows, it would be my only recommendation.
I keep running 5-6 apps same time on a smart phone which is fairly underpowered by today's standards. (9300, running Symbian S80). On my Symbian UIQ3 running P1i, I couldn't get "out of memory" no matter what I do.
If the statement is true somehow, netbook people are really screwed by their hardware and OS vendor (MS). Nobody could even imagine saying such a limit exists on Linux so I wouldn't even mention it.
Also you can't walk and talk same time. Well, theoretically you can but accidents may happen:)
I am trying to say that while telecoms re-dream about it every year, video phone is a bit meaningless thing, it even has cultural reasons too. Just like speech recognition has reached to a point that you can easily dictate your computer but you don't see too many people talking to their computer.
I don't know about USA but I haven't seen a SINGLE video calling person in my life in Europe and even in Japan which is the base of 3G technology.
I had my 3G phone with me while travelling to Japan and while my phone even pushed me to do video calls (via menus etc.) , I didn't really care.
Video calling exists since 33,6K era analogue modems (forgot the standard name) and ISDN, nobody really cares. If Apple can make people use Video calls, my respect to them will really get higher in non technical matter. I mean if they manage to make people staring to their phone screens at the street look "cool".
They could do what Nokia, Sony Ericsson and all other 3G handset makers did. Put a basic camera (640x480) on front of iPhone. But no, they should sell upgrades right? It is one of the smallest cameras you can see and yet it works perfectly for everyone.
They show it as "New Software". If you click it and "Ignore" it from menu, it should disappear. This is in case you updated the Apple Software updater for Windows.
Similar thing would be installing "Apple Software Update" extension to Firefox without users permission and rolling Safari from it. Lets not give them ideas though:)
DRM is part of Windows Media Plugin architecture. It is included even on OS X edition which is completely outdated. If it wasn't included, none of the Wmedia DRM sites would work under Firefox and they would suggest you to use IE instead. That time, many people would flame MS for not supporting Firefox.
The.NET auto update junk is completely stupid though. There are still people who thinks MS had some sort of revolution and defends their junk, wannabe framework on OSS land but it is another matter.
Why should one disable automatic windows updates unless he/she is completely suicidal? Do you know the risk of doing it under a production use XP/Vista? Just look to "downandup", it could be prevented by 2 MB of update from Microsoft.
If you speak about "WGA" etc, it is too late, everyone already got infected by that junk already.
Stop suggesting people they can disable automatic updates. No, they can't. They use Windows and it is what happens when you use windows. It is not an option anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
When Apple shops see absolute newbie trying to buy games and asking for machine specs won't help, they ask a simple question: "Is your Macbook black or white?". If guy answers "White", they grab the heavy 3d titles from his hands saying "It won't work".
You know why? Macbook Pro (black) has a real GPU made by either NVidia or ATI and ordinary Macbook (now changed) has Intel GMA X3100 which really deserves the invented name "crapset". Thank God Apple finally moved to NVidia in new generation.
If someone tells a 1080P (or even 4K, who knows?) next generation game console "features" Intel graphics, you better tell that story.
Intel lacks decades of expertise. Only way to make a decent graphics chipset is acquiring NVidia, fire entire team/developers responsible for Intel GMA scandal and ship them as "Nvidia, by Intel" brand.
Don't fall to their spec pages, read the real life experience of gamers or even Desktop users. nanometer isn't everything especially for a game console.
So what will happen to billions of dollars, millions of engineering work to produce that great Cell broadband engine? Will it be (ab)used for "upscaling" features which are soon to be obsolete thanks to the rise of real HD?
I am glad Toshiba is in Cell board and they make use of the chip in right ways (adding to laptop etc.)
If Intel designs any kind of GPU, that game console and the maker is destined to certain death.
I had chance (!) to use all 3 Intel chipsets for graphics in weeks and immediately cancelled my plans to upgrade aging Mac Mini G4 to Intel because it has that i950 "crapset".
Both NVidia and ATI are good on what they do with years of expertise and know-how. They also know what the real life, gaming is thanks to their huge communities which brings up the issues which Intel or no other company can figure before it happens.
If they abandon their Cell (which they waste with that mem) for Intel CPU, it would be a huge mistake too. CPU isn't the problem, developers who are in still learning process of massive multi processing methods and developer tools are the problem.
I am really glad you debunked the story. Not like Sony wouldn't make such amazingly stupid mistakes...
No, only "Word 6" was directly converted from Windows (as a test) and it was a disaster on Mac scene.
Office 08 for Mac is built on XCode and they even had same problems as open source people because of a way more strict gcc coming with Xcode 3. It was a funny read to see MS struggling with GNU software, thanks to Apple ;)
If you ignore the "I hate M$" comments, their Office blog is really interesting sometimes. http://blogs.msdn.com/macmojo/
Some screenshots there tells me it is a pure Cocoa application.
I am sure there is difference between an Open Office developer's access to Windows internals (undocumented etc.) and MS Office "team members" access.
That gives them advantage and they will never want to lose it. It was also part of "Media Player bundling" issue.
You mean Novell.com and Mono, Moonlight etc.? :)
Does ZFS people work on how to make it perfectly OS X safe with every single HFS+ feature as ".app package", "hidden finder flags" and even "resources"?
I am sure some people confuses OSX with FreeBSD. No, Mac users and even professionals need such features which HFS+ currently provides.
Issue with ZFS is it comes from Sun/Solaris land which really doesn't care about such "lame end user" things. If they demo ZFS perfectly working as native HFS+ on OS X, things could really change. At least for Snow Leopard. By everything, I mean even "Change file type/creator", "change icon", "add Finder flags". That may sound lame but it is real life, DTP people use filetype/creator per file very extensively. Even users want a certain MKV to open with VLC and other with mplayer.
On Windows land, MS is stuck with NTFS emulating MS-DOS junk (8.3 OS parts etc.) so it is beyond hopeless.
It needs end user input, developers who take such things serious and admit there are some operating systems really want backwards compatibility. I speak about Apple which still has "Install MacOS9 drivers" in Leopard disk utility erase and adds a HFS wrapper just to tell the disk is HFS+.
But that edition I mention has potential to run way more apps than the "Pro" version because of reduced system overhead/frameworks/services.
What they try to do is mainframe like artificial process limiting via software. I still hope it is a misunderstanding. It really beats the whole "640K" thing/rumour. If that is the company who controls 90%+ of Desktop market, we really have a problem.
You can't compare Linux or even *BSD to Windows.
How many editions does OS X have? 2. How many editions does Redhat Enterprise, Suse, AIX has? 1
I can ship a "Ilgaz Linux" right away and it wouldn't be Linux or Linus'es fault. It is pure open source and everyone is free to package and ship their own Linux. In case of Windows, even kernels are different.
If Windows 7 is really "the best Windows MS shipped" and fixes the issues of Windows while not torturing user, I would be plain sad for the engineering/coding work wasted by MS suits/accountants/managers.
It looks like Vista. Everyone liked the promises of Vista and right before it shipped, such BS stuff like "editions", "UAC" added.
That "Only 3 apps will run" has the potential of "640K is enough", trust me. Even the worst troll/evil PR company on planet couldn't come up with that.
OS X Server edition is really for servers, optimised for them in every aspect down to how memory is managed. On Windows case, Home version has features which not just admins but a bit technical users may use from time to time. That is why people are driven to pirate Pro version while they have perfectly working and legal Windows Home.
If OS X was like Windows, OS X "home edition" would lack "Time Machine" backup functionality and would ask for Ultimate edition. I also heard they made a good invention of using a cheap usb key,whatever to accelerate systems boot but it is only existing in Ultimate version. Imagine you find a way to fix the number 1 issue of Windows, slow boot and you only give it to "Ultimate" edition users who already has very high end hardware which already fixes it.
What I am saying is, it could be really possible for them as Vista+ only supports NTFS to install and NTFS has "streams" support which can be used as metadata.
The problem is, you are dealing with a company who still insists using 8.3 MSDOS names even on Windows Vista and 7. Expecting them to use something like metadata which is absolutely possible is asking for impossible. I joked about it but let me be clear, if a miracle happens and MS starts to use their own metadata zone... All current rootkit detectors will go nuts! It is because only rootkit developers found a way to use that stale feature.
If you have used OS/2 you know know how advanced "metadata" features are. You can even configure a browser behaviour on a basic, saved web link file. The filesystem is in fact can be called NTFS 1.0 (it is HPFS). They have a way more complex thing in hand and they use it like MS DOS. So there is no "Internet Explorer.exe" and it is still called "iexplore.exe".
It is because MS never used "metadata" stuff in NTFS which exists for years. Apple's "FAT binary" is a good solution since User doesn't see "G4.exe, G5.exe, i386.exe" in their own respective directories.
Also thanks to HFS+ and .app architecture, Apple can easily separate data and code without any ugly look. For apps, there is one data directory (icons, languages, movies) and it will be used regardless of the CPU. Lets say, IE does have its icons, menus in .exe file itself, not in "IE resources". That is how MS had a nice Internet Explorer.app on MacOS/OS X which you can drag to Trash.
Want to see how it looks on NTFS which somehow, insanely trying to look like MS DOS? If you have Apple Quicktime or Safari installed, just look at their directories in "Program Files". Man it is really ugly and confusing.
If MS was really in revolution, they would have started to use NTFS features such as "streams" but of course, that feature is reserved to DOSkit authors now :)
Apple doesn't have problem with people still preferring to use Tiger, a lot of people do BTW and that is why iTools/iWork 08 (until 09) can be installed to Tiger adding their own frameworks and it keeps getting Quicktime/Security updates.
Apple doesn't start a "Mojave experiment" just to prove people that they are hallucinating. In fact, they do everything to keep low Mhz CPU people away from Leopard.
Besides trying to justify their move (a big move) to Intel for portable future, they never said anything bad against G5. G5 was and even still is a great CPU but it can't fit to portable and Apple thinks the future is portable (which already proved right). Of course, a 2008 Xeon will beat G5, I am not saying otherwise.
MS has already an excellent XP edition for netbooks but they keep hiding it to prevent further XP installs (I guess).
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/sa/benefits/fundamentals.mspx
Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs
In fact, if you ask me, it should be installed to anything including Virtual machines. It is the "bare" XP. Nothing else and it works perfectly. If netbook people insist on running Windows, it would be my only recommendation.
I keep running 5-6 apps same time on a smart phone which is fairly underpowered by today's standards. (9300, running Symbian S80). On my Symbian UIQ3 running P1i, I couldn't get "out of memory" no matter what I do.
If the statement is true somehow, netbook people are really screwed by their hardware and OS vendor (MS). Nobody could even imagine saying such a limit exists on Linux so I wouldn't even mention it.
Just over a month ago, I installed Vista home basic to a guys laptop. The critical/security updates were 170 MB.
Also you can't walk and talk same time. Well, theoretically you can but accidents may happen :)
I am trying to say that while telecoms re-dream about it every year, video phone is a bit meaningless thing, it even has cultural reasons too. Just like speech recognition has reached to a point that you can easily dictate your computer but you don't see too many people talking to their computer.
I don't know about USA but I haven't seen a SINGLE video calling person in my life in Europe and even in Japan which is the base of 3G technology.
I had my 3G phone with me while travelling to Japan and while my phone even pushed me to do video calls (via menus etc.) , I didn't really care.
Video calling exists since 33,6K era analogue modems (forgot the standard name) and ISDN, nobody really cares. If Apple can make people use Video calls, my respect to them will really get higher in non technical matter. I mean if they manage to make people staring to their phone screens at the street look "cool".
If everyone starts to do "Video calls" and talk about how amazing iPhone technology is that they can make video calls, don't be surprised.
I am not joking BTW.
They could do what Nokia, Sony Ericsson and all other 3G handset makers did. Put a basic camera (640x480) on front of iPhone. But no, they should sell upgrades right? It is one of the smallest cameras you can see and yet it works perfectly for everyone.
They show it as "New Software". If you click it and "Ignore" it from menu, it should disappear. This is in case you updated the Apple Software updater for Windows.
Similar thing would be installing "Apple Software Update" extension to Firefox without users permission and rolling Safari from it. Lets not give them ideas though :)
DRM is part of Windows Media Plugin architecture. It is included even on OS X edition which is completely outdated. If it wasn't included, none of the Wmedia DRM sites would work under Firefox and they would suggest you to use IE instead. That time, many people would flame MS for not supporting Firefox.
The .NET auto update junk is completely stupid though. There are still people who thinks MS had some sort of revolution and defends their junk, wannabe framework on OSS land but it is another matter.
Why should one disable automatic windows updates unless he/she is completely suicidal? Do you know the risk of doing it under a production use XP/Vista? Just look to "downandup", it could be prevented by 2 MB of update from Microsoft.
If you speak about "WGA" etc, it is too late, everyone already got infected by that junk already.
Stop suggesting people they can disable automatic updates. No, they can't. They use Windows and it is what happens when you use windows. It is not an option anymore.