Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: Mitch <mitch@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 00:37:26 GMT
In article <08s142dearmb7fd4hfvoh0poon5hj61kr3@xxxxxxx>,
<tom_elam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
GG, Why doesn't the multiprocessor support in OS 8 and 9 count?
It worked, it was mainstream, it was even pretty common.
Also, since the cooperative multitasking was pretty decent, and
certainly practical, is wouldn't seem to have been such a disadvantage.
Decent multitasking? It barely ran 2 programs at once. Memory
management? Talk about a klutz. Prior to OS X the Mac had to be
rebooted to def rag ram.
You'll read above my comment was about cooperative multitasking, which
worked very decently, just not ideally. It is obviously nonsense to
suggest it could barely run two programs -- and I often used 4 to 8
programs at once on mine, in common configs.
As I said, it was quite workable and practical -- the things that it
wasn't very good at are avoidable, and I suspect were very rare in the
first place.
Bulletproof? I hear about huge, often critical, and extremely varied OS
problems every single day. You don't expect much from that term, do
you?
Huh? I see hundreds of Windows machines up and running 24x7 at the
university, have never had one fail.
Never had one Windows computer out of hundreds, being used by students,
at a university setting? That is so unbelievable it has to be nonsense,
or a meaningless claim. In my university, it was closer to 1 of 10-20
unusable at any moment, when I was around the labs -- and that doesn't
count software conflicts, malware, or misconfigured hardware.
Excellent? Intuitive? Well, that's what you need to deomonstrate -- not
just claim broadly. I suggest it has been neither, because a person
cannot just walk up to it and start using it in a few minutes without a
lot of knowledge of how to get around first.
(A totally intuitive OS would be one that requires no time to start
doing work; what the industry calls 'transparent.' No one is anywhere
near that, of course.)
Windows is so far from that as to require reading a book first.
Not true. My 6 year old nephew, who is autistic, figured out Windows
all on his own. So do most kids.
And that relates to my requirements in what way?
How much time did he needs to spend from his first exposure to the
computer to the time he was able to get WORK done? (I'll accept
anything that amounts to a desired result from his activity, like
printing out a picture he created on screen.)
Just because YOU can't figure it out does not meanNo, Tom, the problem is that I _CAN_ figure it out -- it just isn't any
that it does not work well for the 95% of us who use it regularly.
damn good in many ways (and I am not saying in every way). And working
"well enough" just isn't anything like the point of these discussions,
is it?
Yes it is. Both OS work well enough. Neither is perfect. That is
the point.
It's that nonsense of 'both work well enough' that you haven't
justified.
And I am claiming that 'well enough' to be used isn't even ten percent
of what the OS should be giving people today.
.
- References:
- Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: Jim Polaski
- Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: tom_elam
- Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: George Graves
- Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: tom_elam
- Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: George Graves
- Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: tom_elam
- Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: Mitch
- Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- From: tom_elam
- Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- Prev by Date: Re: Whee!
- Next by Date: Re: 'Critical' megapatch sews up 10 holes in IE
- Previous by thread: Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- Next by thread: Re: Ensure your New PC will run Vista
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
