_25_11_2024_15_40_33.jpg)
_25_11_2024_15_40_55.jpg)
|
Socoder -> Off Topic -> Dual Pentium IIIs |
|
| Mon, 21 Apr 2008, 19:17 | |
Stealth
|
I bet Mac OS X would be way more popular if they would just let it be installable on 3rd party PC's (and make a more stable PC version).
-=-=- Quit posting and try Google. 
|
| Wed, 23 Apr 2008, 01:41 | |
JL235
|
Mac hardware sales are dramatically on the increase so there is no likely hood of them switching anytime soon. A Mac is also more then just an OS, it's the whole package with style and hardware as standard. If they switched to run on normal PC's then it would probably damage their whole branding and image. Seriously, would MacOS X running on a big ugly Dell really constitute as being a Mac? |
| Sun, 27 Apr 2008, 10:52 | |
|
TheMadProff |
I agree, and one of the main reasons things 'Just work' Is that Apple can design exactly how their hardware works, as windows needs to support loads of different hardware, but OSX doesn't.
-=-=- ''It works, but I'm not sure why it works...'' |
| Sun, 27 Apr 2008, 10:59 | |
|
JL235
|
TheMadProff  I agree, and one of the main reasons things 'Just work' Is that Apple can design exactly how their hardware works, as windows needs to support loads of different hardware, but OSX doesn't. Which is the same reason why Linux doesn't work. |
| Mon, 28 Apr 2008, 05:33 | |
|
mike_g |
I agree, and one of the main reasons things 'Just work' Is that Apple can design exactly how their hardware works, as windows needs to support loads of different hardware, but OSX doesn't. I don't like that slogan; it so patronising. Actually Apple's entire marketing strategy makes me cringe. The sad thing is that clueless people actually buy into it with frenzy. I mean seriously how can a company get people fighting for the right to buy a phone for something like £200 that comes with an 18 month contract that tied to a single service provider. Good for Apple; bad for dipshits. Dont get me wrong I'm not saying all mac users are stupid, but the average mac user is. Which is the same reason why Linux doesn't work.Thats a bit unfair really. Linux works, there just arent always drivers available for new or rare hardware. And until more people start using alternatives other than windows, people are going to keep making non-portable software. Tbh I find I can generally do every I want with linux. And its way more fun to play around with from a programmers point of view than windows is. |
| Mon, 28 Apr 2008, 06:04 | |
HoboBen
|
There is an element of truth in what JL235 said; sometimes it's pot luck trying to get a distro that behaves on a given peice of difficult hardware. Sometimes you can get lucky with a good Dell sale, and order one of their Ubuntu pre-installed laptops. You have to wait a while for the good bargains to pop up (free shipping is the best one - it's £60 otherwise!), but the stuff works flawlessly when you get it. Recently they've started selling them with LinDVD, which I believe is a (albeit proprietry, the license for it is part of what you pay for the machine now) port of the PowerDVD player for windows, which takes a great deal of trouble out of the encrypted DVD playback. You're at a bit of a disadvantage if you prefer another distro though. -=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Mon, 28 Apr 2008, 06:59 | |
|
JL235
|
To be fair I didn't mean that comment too seriously and used to use Linux quite a bit. However driver problems are a real issue for Linux and is the only real reason I no longer boot into my copy of Ubuntu. It is however far worse for some other operating systems such as Solaris, which were designed to be run on hardware primarily produced by one manufacturer. Not too long ago I was fortinate enough to be at a lecture by Peter Dennis who is involved with Open Solaris at Sun Microsystems. Sun are now trying to push Solaris more as an alternative to Linux on both the server and the desktop. Someone in the audience asked about the lack of driver support, primarily in relation to inbuilt wireless cards inside laptops. Peters answer was effectively 'if you really want those drivers you could always write them yourself.' It didn't go down well at all (to be fair his whole section was abismal and the lecture was saved by another employee doing an unrehearsed lecture on ZFS). The lack of good support of a large range of hardware is a huge flaw in non Windows operating systems. I can go into any PC store, buy any piece of hardware, plug it into my PC and there is a very high chance that Windows can install the drivers for me when it boots. No Linux distro has driver support anywhere near on par with that. |
| Tue, 29 Apr 2008, 09:32 | |
|
JL235
|
and it even goes further then that. Just a second ago Vista failed to install a printer. However it has identified that it's a HP printer and it's model, and then given me a link to the very download page on the HP site for the drivers for the printer.
|
| Tue, 29 Apr 2008, 10:38 | |
|
HoboBen
|
Now there you're wrong.  Installing a printer (USB or network) on most distros that I have tried is a matter of three clicks of the "next" button. Installing the same HP printer on windows took me literally two hours! ("What, that 200MB download was *compressed* in some way?") And to top it off, it installed a ton of junk to start whenever I turned my computer on. (It was quite a struggle disabling every last one)
-=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Tue, 29 Apr 2008, 10:46 | |
Jayenkai
|
F'ing HP drivers.. Messy as crap!
|
| Tue, 29 Apr 2008, 10:47 | |
|
JL235
|
I didn't mean it specifically to printers, but more that even when Windows fails to be able to install the driver for me it can then give me a link to the specific page of the manufacturers site where I can download them. I was also on the HP site and yes they do offer a very large pack which includes all the HP printer software which I too do not want. But they also offer (at least for my printer) the drivers on their own without any of that crap for about 50kb. You can then install them using the hardware install wizard. |
| Tue, 29 Apr 2008, 11:15 | |
|
mike_g |
Yes, windows has better driver support without a doubt. That said i have recently found an exception. I got an eeePC about a month back; the first thing I did was install eeeXubuntu. Its basically Ubuntu packaged w/o some of the more bloated components and configured to go. After install everything worked including wireless w/o needing any configuration. Tho I have been tweaking it quite a bit. My friend recently got one and spent the last couple of days setting up xp on it. First it was a problem with the SSHD, then the sound drivers were screwed up. His SD card reader is still gibbing out; mine works fine  The main problem with linux is that its a niche market, and in the past users have been expected to know how everything works. This is changing (slowly) though. Also, Vista has pretty pitiful driver support especially for 64bit systems. Everytime I turn on this computer I get spammed with messages telling me that one of my HP drivers (that came with the OEM install) is blocked beacause of incompatibility issues. The only reason I havent got rid of Vista yet is because I'm too lazy. |
| Tue, 29 Apr 2008, 14:14 | |
Scherererer
|
No. printer support just sucks everywhere. I had a bitch of a time getting printers working on linux, and on windows. It is really just a problem of the fact that there are SO MANY printers out there, and it seems like none of them use a common driver/communication system... mike_g: Those EeePC's are a hot item nowadays! you happy with yours? -=-=- YouTube Twitter Computer Science Series: Logic (pt1) (part 2) (part 3) 2's Complement Mathematics: Basic Differential Calculus
|
| Tue, 29 Apr 2008, 14:23 | |
|
JL235
|
Microsoft do also have a room filled with as many different types of printers and scanners that they can find. It was on a Channel 9 video and they even said that sometimes they have had to resort to buying some rare types off of eBay.
|
| Wed, 30 Apr 2008, 05:55 | |
|
mike_g |
Those EeePC's are a hot item nowadays! you happy with yours? Yeah its very handy even fits in my pocket (my jacket has a big pocket in it). The screens only 7 inches and the low 800 * 480 res is probably its worst aspect. Still, the dot pitch is very fine. I worry that if I use it too much tho I might end up with a hunchback. So I set lots of keybindings so I can weild it like a gameboy now. Anyway, I'm very happy with mine. |
| Fri, 02 May 2008, 14:36 | |
|
mindstorm8191 |
Ya know, on the subject of IBM considering core processors on their blades (which I've seen very high interest for large-scale companies), I think they should begin developing their own OS. I mean, IBM has the hardware knowledge to build an OS on top of to maximize performance. I think a lot of companies would be interested in a high-performance OS, which is easy to use and develop for. The way I see it, companies have 3 options: Macs, with weak hardware that nobody develops for anyway; Windows, which you can either live with the threat of viruses & malware or spend thousands to protect your PC; or Linux, which requires lots of knowledge in to develop anything for, and not many people use it either. Anyway, about the extra Pentium III chip you got, I think if you can't find a motherboard to accept it, your best bet is to sell it on eBay. -=-=- Vesuvius web game
|
| Fri, 02 May 2008, 19:14 | |
|
Scherererer
|
You're right, IBM should make an OS. I have a great name for it, how about OS/2 Warp. That's a good name.
-=-=- YouTube Twitter Computer Science Series: Logic (pt1) (part 2) (part 3) 2's Complement Mathematics: Basic Differential Calculus
|
| Sat, 03 May 2008, 07:00 | |
|
JL235
|
Nah, IBM should call it VM or Z/OS instead of OS/2. Mindstorm, a companies options on OS depends entirely on the situation where it will be run. There is also Solaris as another alternative. |
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||