On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 12:21:47 +0200, narcan wrote:
> Same can be said about Windows or Mac OS X. Linux works though, just not for
> the less intelligible (it's a pain though, I agree). All these old fashion
> architectures are a pain, we need something new, starting with a truly
> hardware abstract kernel (which means running on a virtual cpu), something
> like elate from the tao group. This would also mean that software would
> start to define hardware, which is the way things should be anyway. I had
> good hopes for MS when they started talking minwin, regrettably they seem to
> have abandoned this particular idea and are going for a Vista Part Deux.
Interesting POV.
I think to some degree the software is defining the hardware these days.
Look at Windows or Linux and you can see each new major version requires
more hardware horsepower to run.
Albeit this is less so with Linux IMHO.
I feel OSX coupled with the Mac is really a true end user based system
because it just works. Windows XP is close but requires a little more care
and feeding, mostly in terms of security, and Linux is at the bottom
because the typical desktop user will be frustrated trying to make it work
with common gadgets like GPS, PDA, cell phones etc.
Vista is just a train wreck IMHO.
Microsoft will eventually iron out the bugs but currently my advice is to
stick with XP.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
|
|
