vigormusic
New member
thank you very much sir.
bdemenil said:I haven't had very good experiences with USB hard drives - USB is not a good protocol for high bandwidth data transfer. As elevate stated above, firewire is much better.
bdemenil said:And in the server market - where cost, performance, and reliability are much more important than image - nobody uses Mac.
giraffe said:in the pro realm macs are just used more in recording audio, editing video, and desktop publishing.
thare is probably a reason
noodles2k5 said:I had actually typed Firewire at first but posted USB 2.0 because of its 480mbps compared to Firewire's 400mbps. It's not always faster in sustained throughput though. But that's beside the point. I meant you can get an external drive for higher performance.
That's funny. I work for this place called NASA and we use a few of them. And by a few, I mean I have over 20 in my office.
So that's what the government does with our money?That's funny. I work for this place called NASA and we use a few of them. And by a few, I mean I have over 20 in my office.
Polaris20 said:One thing I can say about Apple in comparison to Windows is this:
Latest benchmarks for Tiger just came out (I'll find the link if anyone's really interested) and even a lowly 400Mhz G3 runs great with it, and actually it runs faster on that and every chip above it than 10.3.8 did. Apple increased the performance with a new version of the OS.
Comparing system resources for an OS that will be released in a couple weeks to an OS that may or may not be released in a year is a tad disingenuous. Tiger is far more like XP than it is to the projected featureset of Longhorn.Polaris20 said:Microsoft, on the other hand, released preliminary minimum requirements for Longhorn: 3Ghz HT P4, 512MB RAM. It requires more resources.
Craigory said:I personally can't stand spending hours fixing bad printer divers.
elevate said:Comparing system resources for an OS that will be released in a couple weeks to an OS that may or may not be released in a year is a tad disingenuous. Tiger is far more like XP than it is to the projected featureset of Longhorn.
HangDawg said:The problem may be you and not the computer. Ever think of that? All these people that say PCs are unstable just don't know how to maintain them.
That would be called feature creep.Polaris20 said:Well, Longhorn was already supposed to be released, but due to setbacks is being held back.
How are you quantifying this? How do you know how many features will be in Longhorn. I'm an MSDN Universal subscriber, and as such am privy to a bit of insider info, but in no way do I have any idea how many features will be in Longhorn. So, unless you're employed by Microsoft, I fail to see how you can say with any degree of certainty that Longhorn will have less features than Tiger.And actually, Tiger will have more features than Longhorn will. I am not defending anything, just stating the facts.
elevate said:That would be called feature creep.
How are you quantifying this? How do you know how many features will be in Longhorn. I'm an MSDN Universal subscriber, and as such am privy to a bit of insider info, but in no way do I have any idea how many features will be in Longhorn. So, unless you're employed by Microsoft, I fail to see how you can say with any degree of certainty that Longhorn will have less features than Tiger.
Avalon, Indigo, and WinFX are each, architecturally, much larger than anything being released in Tiger.
elevate said:Comparing system resources for an OS that will be released in a couple weeks to an OS that may or may not be released in a year is a tad disingenuous. Tiger is far more like XP than it is to the projected featureset of Longhorn.
from article said:Allchin stressed that Microsoft has broken new ground in Longhorn. For example, document icons are no longer a hint of the type of file, but rather a small picture of the file itself. The icon for a Word document, for example, is a tiny iteration of the first page of the file
from article said:At the time, the company focused largely on the "under the hood" features of the OS--in particular, a new file system, Web services architecture and the presentation system.
from article said:Since then, Microsoft has significantly reshaped the OS. Last year, the company announced that it would pull out the new file system and that the Web services and presentation pieces would also be made available for Windows XP.
These are Longhorn technologies that are being worked into XP. This is kind of like giving game developers pre-release copies of an X-Box or PlayStation. These are core technologies that Microsoft wants fully exploited by developers when Longhorn drops.Polaris20 said:WinFS in XP:
Avalon and Indigo in XP:
As if a brand new filesystem, a brand new display layer, a brand new communications infrastructure, and a brand new managed API are not groundbreaking enough? These are all serious under the hood things.If there's anything more groundbreaking, I'd be surprised. Of course I'd hope there'd be more features, for that kind of system requirements.
Aside from miscellaneous little utility apps, what's so much more advanced? CoreImage is being touted as something incredibly fabulous, but it's really just a simplified version of the various DirectX calls - that is, simply a hardware abstraction layer to more easily fascilitate display functionality. I've seen FileVault heralded as something great - welcome to Windows circa 5 years ago. I'll admit that Tiger has more bundled apps than Windows does, but this is an area where Microsoft has to tread lightly anyway. And besides, do you really want to establish a trend where you, the OS company, copies or buys out every developer for your platform? Regardless, Tiger has more stuff that you need a 3rd party app for in Windows, but in so much as it being more "advanced", I don't see it. Perhaps you can shed some light here.I don't see how Tiger is more like XP, but maybe I'm missing something. seems to me it's far more advanced.
I use and prefer Microsoft stuff, but I do own a Powerbook, and I will give Apple credit when they're due it.I can tell you're more of a fan of MS, and that's fine. I use Windows too, but I am not biased towards something else just because I don't use it.
elevate said:Regardless, Tiger has more stuff that you need a 3rd party app for in Windows, but in so much as it being more "advanced", I don't see it. Perhaps you can shed some light here.
I use and prefer Microsoft stuff, but I do own a Powerbook, and I will give Apple credit when they're do it.
Exactly, yet to see it, and already claiming Tiger is more advanced and has more features, yet you still won't tell me what exactly makes it more advanced.Polaris20 said:And I'll give MS their credit when they deserve it. But I've yet to see it, and I've seen the hype before.
elevate said:Exactly, yet to see it, and already claiming Tiger is more advanced and has more features, yet you still won't tell me what exactly makes it more advanced.
Polaris20 said:I don't see how Tiger is more like XP, but maybe I'm missing something. seems to me it's far more advanced.
As far as features, Tiger has 200 new features (I know, many little misc. "neato" features). Longhorn has 3 new features.