so is mac osx leopard going to be the new hotness when it's released?

What you don't understand is that out of the "thousands" of brands for vairious controllers, hardware, ect, the majority of them use the same processors from only a few manufacturers. That and you also should consider the fact that you can usualy find open source drivers or patches for these products online.
 
What I'm really saying is that if this was 2001 then OSX 10.0 might be teh new hotness. But it's 2007, OSX despite a new version is not undergoing a long-awaited reinvention, and Windows is.

Harp on Vista copying OSX all you want, but the Vista features in question were all in development before their counterparts showed up in OSX. And anyway, you can't expect MS to just not compete with what we all knew was a functionally superior operating system with many desirable features. It should be a credit to MS that 6 months ago I had a burning desire for a Mac, and today I only have a burning desire for an extra gigabyte of memory
 
By the way, I'm no MS apologist. I've been running Windows 2000 since... well, 2000, because after using XP for about 3 months once it proved stable, I concluded that it had the most horrible, boneheaded, and irritating GUI shell ever devised by man.

2000 was a great OS because it had to be great to compete with Linux. Vista is a great OS because it has to be to compete with OS X. MS clearly does their job well when the heat is on.
 
Not to mention that these mac fags dont realize it takes a LOT longer to develope for windows because of all the hardware while its exponentially easier to develope an OS for apple because of all the closed hardware.

And I own/use almost everyone OS there is including OSX 10.4 on powerbook, Windows Vista on desktop, Windows XP MCE on laptop with Unbunut dual boot.
 
And exactly what is this hardware you speak of that won't run in OSX but makes Windows infinitely harder to program?? About all I can think of is maybe sound/video cards. But since Macs run ATI or Intel video chipsets, and last time I checked PCs can too, those are pretty much ruled out. So exactly what is Bill Gates' excuse for taking so many years to release technology that the tiny little Apple has had for years?
 
Apple uses a limited selection of hardware. (You cant buy different hardware and mix and match) OSX do not have to support a million different hardware while windows have to support basically every single piece of hardware out there.

Try installing OSX on a PC, and see how stable it is (not as solid as on Apple hardware).
 
About the only limitation on hardware is the logic board and processor. If you get a mac pro, or powermac, you can swap out anything else. Video cards, sound cards, drives, anything. Not to mention that everything you plug in via USB and firewire is truly plug and play, a concept Microsoft has yet to grasp.

And I would venture to say that OSX on a PC, as downright stupid as it may be, will be more stable than Windows due to the Unix based architecture, I could be wrong, but that's my take on it.
 
There is a tremendous variety of processors and system boards in the PC world. Chipsets from Intel, nVidia, ATI, AMD, VIA, SiS, and Uli and boards by dozens of manufacturers. Six processor architectures in common circulation.

Apple is currently selling... three distinct processors on two distinct platforms. With the legacy G4/G5 which are being phased out as OSX moves onward and upward.
 
Back
Top