81–90 of 329 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google Nexus 7 does run on Linux.
Can we stop calling Android Linux just because it shares the Linux kernel? Obviously the author was referring to a GNU/Linux distro.
The issue has to be engineering. Is it a case of too much distance between the HW and SW people?
> The issue has to be engineering. Did... did you just invent the technology version of Fr Jack's "That would be an ecumenical matter."
Here it is on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIto5mwDLxo&feature=youtube_...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google Nexus 7 does run on Linux.
Can we stop calling Android Linux just because it shares the Linux kernel? Obviously the author was referring to a GNU/Linux distro.
I'd be interested to see the answer for an out of the box Ubuntu distribution (latest stable version), as well as the answer for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, to cover the "leading brands" for the consumer and business markets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because re-writing for a new platform isn't trivial. Because the customers want it. They're intelligent enough to know that a tablet isn't going to be as productive as a desktop/laptop. But they still want it.
Customers generally do not want to run Windows apps on their tablet. If they did then Surface Pro would be the number one seller.
Our's would be such an application but even as it is there are certain aspects of its typical daily use that might/would be best served by a tablet.
At those times it would be nice for a user to be able to switch from one device to the other and then back again.
In fact, requests like this are becoming more frequent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A quick Google search shows many Windows laptops with equivalent or better battery life. Is your question why don't all Windows laptops have equal battery life?
> A quick Google search shows many Windows laptops with equivalent or better battery life. I don't want to state the obvious, but different laptops have different capacity batteries. Atwood was comparing the 11" MBA to the Surface Pro 2 as they have similar battery capacities (SP2: 42 Wh, MBA: 38 Wh), and - as Maakuth notes -- are both made by companies in control of both software and hardware. The fact that you can…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mac apps can't run on iOS because of the architecture difference. It's the same reason Windows apps can't run on Surface RT.
They could. Apple run PowerPC apps on Intel processors. The real answer is that they don't want them to.
Rosetta is neither included nor supported in Mac OS X v10.7 "Lion" or later. Therefore, with Lion and later releases, the current Macintosh platform does not support PowerPC applications.
Microsoft turned Windows 95 into a full-fledged multi-user operating system. Segmented user space? Unix had done that for years. All users where admin and it was horrible, but lot's of apps ran on it, so people bought it and used it. Then they merged Win95 into WinNT and gave us Windows 2000. Now they are turning a full-fledged multi-user OS into a tablet OS. Let's make this tank into a bicycle. History tells us ther…
In any 5 year period, Apple has a tiny list of exact hardware configurations OS X is designed to run on. It's so small, they even use the OS X software update mechanism to push BIOS updates! They have so much room to do better than Microsoft here it's barely even funny. This isn't an excuse for Microsoft's poor performance, but if you try to gloss over the fact as Atwood does here, then you're omitting the full truth.
While the core subject seems fair enough, I'd expect Atwood not to be so utterly stupid by trying to swap out Apple OS X running on one of a highly restricted variety of Apple Mac hardware with a generic Windows install and expect the result to be competitive. That's boxes-with-arrows mentality at its worst right there. In any 5 year period, Apple has a tiny list of exact hardware configurations OS X is designed to r…
> And that battery life gap is worse today – even when using Microsoft's own > hardware, designed in Microsoft's labs, running Microsoft's latest operating > system released this week.
The benchmark which is missing to make this article more relevant, though, is to measure and compare a hackintosh (i.e. non-apple PC + Mac OS X) battery performance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because re-writing for a new platform isn't trivial. Because the customers want it. They're intelligent enough to know that a tablet isn't going to be as productive as a desktop/laptop. But they still want it.
Customers generally do not want to run Windows apps on their tablet. If they did then Surface Pro would be the number one seller.