"Users switching from Internet Explorer sometimes experience that some websites do not render correctly in Firefox [this can obviously also be applied to other standards-compliant browsers]. This is almost always due to the said website using non standards-compliant Internet Explorer specific code or ActiveX applets on their site." Whatever. I can't do anything about it. All I know is that at least 1/3 of the webpages I visit only come right in MS
TexasJoe
WolfwoodX: (if you were vehemently talking to me). I rarely play games because college takes away all my spare time, but then on vacation I can take that same good ol' laptop of mine and play HL2 with full details. XP Pro doesn't cost $300 and as a student I got Office Pro for 100 bucks. Your comparison is irrelevant and I ain't married. Your last sentence is short of hypocrisy.
"Naturally binaries compiled for an operating system with specific APIs on a certain processor architecture won't run on a different, incompatible operating system that runs on a completely different architecture." "Pages are loaded as they should be on standards compliant browsers. I believe Safari is standards compliant. I also believe Firefox is available for the Mac." Y'all are all hat and no cattle. Stating truths to counter valid ar
I expect my computer to play games that are more graphically advanced than on XBOX/PS2 and the likes. A PC is a console if I want it to. MAC lacks this graphics card upgradability + lacks compatibility with most commercial games, therefore limits what you can do on it! I can't play Half Life 2 on any console anyway. If it's not for playing games, neither is it for browsing: so many pages are not loaded as they should on Safari or MAC's MS Intern
hallelujah Brad! though some details might be inaccurate, it says it all: Apple does get away with stuff MS couldn't possibly consider doing. XP is not a service pack to 2000 Pro. "Version 5" only serves to remind that both are built on a similar NT5-core (NTFS + networking tools) ! Longhorn will be Windows version 6.0 since it incorporates new core technologies. Anyhow why bother talking about an OS that won't let y'all play g
A service pack also intends to improve the O.S. and I believe Apple also included in its Tiger upgrade all iterim security/ bug fixes that it had posted on a monthly or yearly basis for Mac OS (I don't remember the frequency). In any case you're way too biased as you don't even want to admit XP brought in a shovelful of advancements from Windows 98 or ME. Look at your control panel, browsing capabilities, WMP... Your memory is so short-termed, or we've
that's right Gnome in the Red Hat, especially now when we're in a period of transition to new hardware. No real big change in on the graphics side, dual-core processors powered by x64 need a little price redress before hitting mainstream.
I don't agree with what gnomeintheredhat said about Longhorn's being continuously stripped of its features. Except WinFS (which will require a few months more to finalize after longhorn is released in Oct 2006). I believe the trend goes the other way as new ideas of improvements are being added to Longhorn on a regular basis. I also disagree with the advice he gives his customers. I corroborate what he said about dual-core processors, AMD's a
whatever dude. I read about the new features. $130 sure is excessive. I don't think it's worth half the price. Below $70 would've been in my view a more reasonable price point (if ever charging consumers is justified to reward the development time spent)
I don't have any stability issues with SP2. Works like a charm! But hey maybe it's because I can use an OS correctly?
I have a 4th generation iPod 20GB that I've gotten for free. Pros: compact, decent headphones, fast USB2 transfer rates, functional, easy on the eyes (though I don't really see anything of its design from inside its sock in my pants pocket) Cons: -price is so overrated (google "price+overrated" --> you'll get sthg related to the iPod on the first page) -not compatible with protected WMA files, you'll have to burn your WMA f
I honestly don't know who of MS or Apple is the greedier! There's a whole lot MS offers for free to Windows users. I take it this is not the same with Apple, stealing ideas from smaller developers and selling'em at an inflated price! Look at the iPods, their price is way overrated for what it is. Making big bugs at y'all's expense and y'all are begging for some more. Good it keeps the economy going... until the Fed'l Trade Commission makes it even with
IconPackager, WindowBlinds, ObjectDock Plus, DesktopX & IconX, WindowFX --> all the time I don't use CursorXP anymore coz it's a processor hog and may soon do away with WindowFX too, because I hate when my system doesn't respond to my clicks. Other than that I couldn't live without IP & WB, DX is a plus but still needs improvement.
I woudn't personally call this regression but being schedule-conscious and smart. And please quit the blasphemous swearing please.
I respectlfully disagree. Paul Thurrott who I trust to be an unbiased journalist wrote in his review: "Apple Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" is the strongest OS X release yet and a worthy competitor to Windows XP. Though it is marketed by Apple as a major release, Tiger is in fact a minor upgrade with few major new features for end users (though developers will be interested in some of the low-level work Apple has done with Core Image, Core Audio, and oth
you got it mormegil, Tiger is nothing but a Service Pack that Apple charges you the price of a full upgrade. With Windows you get that stuff for free. I sure feel bad for y'all who use Apple's OS and have to pay big bucks for their service packs!
Yee-haawww!
Vorsavhit: LOL! your argument is valid to a limited extent only! I'm a Windows user, right. I've been forced to use Mac OS X for 2 or 3 months at college for some computing class and lemme tell you something: I kept changing computers thru that term because they were all falling to pieces, refused to boot, the browsing experience was terrible, none was behaving adequately, everything was so slow... So it all boils down to the quality of the computer's
Specs aren't out yet. I understand your system should run Aero Glass just fine. I mean your graphics card makes up for the little clockspeed your processor may lack.
double submission
Great digression Judge! FYI, as jeffsosta stated, Longhorn is still in Alpha (Pre-Beta) stage. If you knew how different early builds of codename Whistler were compared to XP RTM then you would refrain from being unconstructive. To assume that in pre-beta builds we've seen it all of Longhorn is making a misinformed statement.
I forgot to say that the 3 pillars Indigo, Avalon and WinFS will be back-ported to XP in such a way that their implementation on XP will offer an incomplete experience compared to their implementation on codename Longhorn. I don't have yet many examples to illustrate my point. Security will be a relatively big issue here: these components won't be as secure on XP as they will be on LH because LH is their native environment - kind of. There's also the g
Essencay: you certainly need to document yourself on Longhorn. I've personally watched hours of interviews in which developpers were detailing all the parts that'll make up codename Longhorn and any one who has that kind of interest in OS's and software technology advancement in general can't deny the fact that Longhorn will be a giant leap forward! PLUS - "but why waste my resources on that and reduce my current level of productivity" = erroneous,