or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by steveH

Have you looked lately at laptop vs desktop sales trends over the past five or so years? Desktops are moving pretty definitely into niche market territory. Considering sales figures include desktop machines sold into corporations, used as POS terminals and so on, it's even worse. Consider also that schools, which used to be big buyers of desktops are moving strongly toward replacing them with laptops.
If they did, they were ignored by Toshiba, whose Folio was a short-selling tablet from last year.
In real world practice, yes, that's generally what happens. Once a new OS ships, the previous version usually won't see any changes other than some minor bug or security fixes. Expending the major effort and expense of testing and qualifying new hardware is rarely justifiable.
If it's really a brand new user, she won't have older software to worry about not running. Think about it.
- 2010 13" MBA, 2009 24" iMac, 2007 20" iMac all have Lion. Happily. (Similar to my wife's two Macs.) - 1999 Tangerine iBook, 10.3.9, which is as far as you can take it. (Ex Post Facto sort of gets you around that, but in the long run isn't worth doing on that machine.)
What in the world did you expect? The earlier OS versions won't have necessary drivers for any changed hardware in the machine. Most things could work, some not. This seems to surprise you for some reason.
You might want to get your ears checked, or borrow the wayback machine to revisit the majority of consumer press reviews of the first two generations of the MBA. "Overpriced for what you get" was just the lead in...
Utter nonsense.Except for those using mobile devices that might like to actually have a consistent, smoothly operating user experience in the future. Flash on mobile really doesn't work all that well.And the personal (even small business) computer world used to depend on BASIC for commercial applications. And 20mA current-loop interfaces for printers. Things change, and tech development usually moves toward better performance and utility, or at least the potential for them.
Just normal corporate domestic tax rates. You don't have a problem with that, do you? On which they pay taxes to the countries in question. You'd prefer they were double taxed on offshore income? Why do that, when they've got sizable foreign operations to run?
You say that like it's a bad thing.
New Posts  All Forums: