All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
,,,hmm
voidmain:
Gump, I wondered how you got those 5 stars. Now I see how!
<Zombie9920>:
Ecliptic Zero wrote,
"If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today."
------------------
That is true. If it wasn't for Microsoft Windows we wouldn't have processors running at 1ghz+, we wouldn't have Video cards with a built in GPU capable of displaying incredible 3D images w/good FPS, we wouldn't have advanced sound cards, etc.
Why, Microsoft doesn't make the stuff? You may ask. The answer is simple, Microsoft Windows started becoming more and more system demanding therefore forcing hardware manufacturers to make faster/better hardware to make the latest and greatest OSes run decent. God knows we wouldn't have the GeForce/Voodoo/Kyro II/Radeon if we were all using Linux boxes simply because Linux isn't a very good gaming OS. The only APIs compatible with Linux is OpenGL and OpenAL. Direct3D and Direct Sound are definatley superior to OpenGL and OpenAL because of all the Eye/Ear Candy that can be used with the API. Why would CPU/Memory/chipset/hard drive makers improve thier hardware for Linux since runs fine on low end systems? We all can thank Windows for the advancement of technology.
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
Ecliptic Zero wrote,
"If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today."
------------------
God knows we wouldn't have the GeForce/Voodoo/Kyro II/Radeon if we were all using Linux boxes simply because Linux isn't a very good gaming OS.
--- End quote ---
I certainly won't pretend to be a gamer, I'd rather be out doing the real thing but I can't help to remember back when Doom II came out. Right away there was a version for Linux. You gamers probably know the guy's name, I certainly dont but I think he founded idSoftware? At any rate the documentation that came along with the Linux version included a comment by the guy who wrote it. It roughly said, "Why did I write a version of Doom II for Linux and give it out for free? Because Linux gives me a woody."
<Zombie9920>:
EclipticZero wrote,
".NET sounds fantastic, infact, having all of these new .NET services should be interesting to hear about. My Photos for example will be able to help the average computer user add, remove and even share photos with the family and friends."
--------------------------------------------------
I like the concept of .NET where we will be able to go anywhere on the net with a single passport.
I don't like the concept of .NET because it will lock any OS that isn't running a .NET OS out of alot of sites. I don't think it is right for Bill to do this because it will cripple the World Wide Web for other OSes. Knowing Microsofts track record, there will be alot of big sites that will jump on the .NET bandwagon. I don't think it is right to lock users of alternative OSes out of the net. Microsoft needs competition. If Bill crushes all alternative OSes it will result in a future of Microsoft products that aren't improved much because there will be no compelling reason for him to lure new computer users in plus the free MS updates we know and love(LOL) will probably no longer be free.
gump420:
quote:Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
Ecliptic Zero wrote,
"If it weren't for Microsoft, Computers would not be what they are today."
------------------
That is true. If it wasn't for Microsoft Windows we wouldn't have processors running at 1ghz+, we wouldn't have Video cards with a built in GPU capable of displaying incredible 3D images w/good FPS, we wouldn't have advanced sound cards, etc.
Why, Microsoft doesn't make the stuff? You may ask. The answer is simple, Microsoft Windows started becoming more and more system demanding therefore forcing hardware manufacturers to make faster/better hardware to make the latest and greatest OSes run decent. God knows we wouldn't have the GeForce/Voodoo/Kyro II/Radeon if we were all using Linux boxes simply because Linux isn't a very good gaming OS. The only APIs compatible with Linux is OpenGL and OpenAL. Direct3D and Direct Sound are definatley superior to OpenGL and OpenAL because of all the Eye/Ear Candy that can be used with the API. Why would CPU/Memory/chipset/hard drive makers improve thier hardware for Linux since runs fine on low end systems? We all can thank Windows for the advancement of technology.
--- End quote ---
Nah, it's still a load of dung. Okay, M$ made their OSes more demanding, thus causing a round of updates to the hardware. But _why_ did they make this switch? To copy Apple, or course. Thus in turn, making credit go to Apple for continuing to innovate while M$ continued to copy them.
Okay, let's go after another flaw in this logic. "Why would hardware manufacterers update their software so Linux would run faster?" is more or less your statement. Hardware manufacturers don't make upgrades for the convenience of the poor souls out their running Winblows; they make upgrades so that they can sell them. As long as they can continue to up the Mhz, they can continue to sell the babies. It has nothing to do with Windows (which runs fine in any flavor on about a 700Mhz computer - I could also use said computer to run just about any game I wanted).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version