or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by DJRumpy

Can you provide a link that has information where four cores will benefit more than any multi-core processor?
lol..Thanks for a good chuckle this morning Gazoobee Even if the other guy didn't like being jabbed at his own expense, nice touch of humor there...
Man I should drink more coffee before posting. I meant to say that SL is noticeably faster, but that doesn't it would overpower a quad core in Windows as a result.Apparently I shouldn't try to multi-task this early in the morning either
Third party benchmarks can be had all over the net:http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/i...S&NewsID=27015http://gizmodo.com/5345354/snow-leop...electedImage=1http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/17/s...ost-video-enc/ No one is saying (or I should say I'm not saying as i haven't read all of the replies..lol) that SL is noticeably faster. I'm genuinely curious where this information is that SL will only really benefit quad core? This is the first I'm reading of it. Could you post...
The support model really isn't any different. If these MS guys should find that the issue is hardware (say driver for example) related, they will just refer them back to the hardware vendor. Since Apple is a one stop shop, the process is more streamlined (and definitely easier with known hardware configurations), but the basic business model is the same. The difference here being MS would have to refer the user outside of it's support structure for help, while Apple would...
If the market was that 'competitive', I wouldn't be paying $30 for an unlimited text plan.
You do realize that many of the advancements in SL won't be realized until the applications are written to take advantage of it. That said there are immediate differences in speed (yes some even 2.5 times faster than under leopard). The difference is very noticeable.That said, a faster processor in any Mac is always a welcome sight
Every Mac takes maybe 10 minutes to upgrade the ram with cheap after market memory. $100 bucks and your done, even on the iMac and the Mini.
You seem to be implying that support for Windows isn't technically viable, which is a bit of an exaggeration. IT shops around the world support Windows on a variety of hardware platforms. Most end user problems can be chalked up to basic user error, configuration/conflict issues, or hardware failures. User errors and hardware failures are often the easiest to troubleshoot. It's the weird ones that are a pain in the arse. Windows is definitely NOT error free, but it is well...
I would guess that MS has the funds, and considers this an experiment in it's own right. More of a 'what if' scenario for them. MS has more money than they know what to do with. There is always the possibility that this could drum up business, or change the 'cheap' image that MS has, which may be the intended result all along. This may be less about making sales, and more about changing perception of MS itself.
New Posts  All Forums: