Re: Linux Poised To Take DAW Software Crown From ProTools.
- From: "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 09:16:38 -0400
"gjsmo" <gabjsmo0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:79e0a576-ff45-4554-8031-ec1687598662@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Oct 31, 4:46 pm, "Arny Krueger" <ar...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As a heavy audio and video user of ridiculously stable windows boxes, I
don't know what you are talking about.
Hmm... I do. I have never seen a Mac computer crash because of asoftware fault. Not even driver issues. And the hardware is top-notch,
too.
Your lack of real world experience with Macs is showing. They crash, too. I
know, because people ask me to help them with their Apples and I decline
because I want to maintain focus.
Comparing Macs with thieir narrow hardware and software options to Windows
machines where *everything* goes is fair as long as you don't have the same
expectations.
With liberty comes responsibility and accountability. People are foolish if
they expect the liberty of Windows but don't want to take responsibility for
what that liberty necessarily brings with it.
Windows, however, will crash and burn like a stick of TNT drenched ingasoline.
Windows will run forever if you know what you are doing. I'm still building
a few *new* Win98 systems that people are using to maintain compatibility
with legacy hardware and software. If you use the right hardware and
software, Win98 (not even the preferred SE version) can run like a clock for
years between boots.
Not even remotely enough tolerance for bad drivers or programs. Maybe
you're just really lucky.
You obviously have no idea what havoc a poorly written driver can do and why
it must be allowable. You obviously know way too little about computer
science expecially operating system design, to be making the broad claims
that you seem to be making.
Interestingly enough one major difference between the current Intel Mac OS
and windows is again the driver support.
You've said a mouthful that you obviously don't appreciate. There is,
comparitively speaking *almost no* driver support in the Mac OS. Can anybody
even estimate the number of different pieces of hardware for which Windows
drivers exist? With a Mac the list is relatively very short. By their
very nature some drivers must operate in a highly priveleged state. With
that power comes accountability that not every driver writer can actually
step up to.
Mac software has very limited
driver support as compared to Windows. A current Mac is basically just
another kind of PC clone at 2-3 times the price. And, if it weren't for
Windows most of the hardware that most people run *nix on wouldn't exist.
Yes, but Macs run Mac OS X, which is inherently more stable - better
protection against crashes, for one thing.
There is zero reliable technical evidence to support that claim. If I'm
wrong, cite it.
Also, Macs use EFI and not BIOS, which is something that should've been
in PCs 10 years ago.
EFI is just a different name for firmware that every modern computer must
have. The alternative to firmware is to have the end user store a boot
program into execuitable memory using front panel switches or something like
them. Before there was firmware, hardware engineers had to tediously design
and implement dedicated hardware to initiate the boot process. I've been
around long enough (over 50 years of hands-on experience with computers at
all levels) to work at both the hardware & software maintenance as well as
the user level with machines that used that ancient and arcane process, as
long as every subsequent step along the way through today.
Gjsmo, you obvously have little or no clue about what the firmware of a
modern PC or other computer involves.
The PC architecture originated from IBM, who needed an OS for theirnew PC, and asked Microsoft. They bought DOS from Tandy, literally
across town, and sold it to IBM with the Microsoft name. It became the
default OS, and since IBM released literally EVERYTHING needed to
clone a PC (schematics, instruction sets, you name it), when everyone
copied it, they copied the OS too. Microsoft quickly became the
default OS on every computer. Of course, most of the the *nix's
weren't even written for x86 to begin with, but it just so happened
that the architecture got really big, fast, so it made sense to make a
C compiler at some point and put Unix and Linux on a PC.
Ancient history which is completely irrelevant to the following false claim:
So Windows had very little to do with the development of PCs.
Gjsmo, you shouldn't insult people who actually understand hardware and
system software with such ignorant and specious claims. I've personally run
and done detailed hardware and software maintenance on every version of
mainstream PC OS software from MS DOS 1.0 to Windows 1.0 through Windows
7/64 and also many not-so-mainstream kinds of PC software including CP/M,
OS/2, and several flavors of *nix.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Linux Poised To Take DAW Software Crown From ProTools.
- Next by Date: Re: Linux Poised To Take DAW Software Crown From ProTools.
- Previous by thread: Re: Linux Poised To Take DAW Software Crown From ProTools.
- Next by thread: Re: Linux Poised To Take DAW Software Crown From ProTools.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
