<strong>You can use != for does not equal and almost everyone who has had any programming experience in the last 15-20+ years will recognize that as pretty standard syntax.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OOOHHH!! I thought it meant ! as in 4!=24 (as in something that is a whole lot bigger... IE Luna!=Aqua (luna * luna-1 * luna -2 until luna-x=1 = Aqua) )
OK, if anyone understood what I meant.. please tell me i'm not crazy...
the funny thing is that my "definition" actually made sence a lot of the time...
<strong>Has anyone seen a Jaguar demo of scrolling text anywhere? Or dynamically resizing Finder windows of large directories? Those would show under the hood OS level speedups much more effectively than zoom-in/out or a whole bunch ot QT clips and transparent Terminal windows that show off just the compositing improvements.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Scrolling and other stuff could very well be faster with QE simply because the CPU isn't splitting time between doing the compositing and doing its "normal" functions. Depends on where the slowest/weakest link in the chain is (bus, cache, RAM, central processor, graphics processor, etc.) which is the whole point of the GPU requirement and the thread that was going earlier on the subject.
But AFAIK, there are some minor improvements in Quartz 2D drawing, but no major changes in its API.
>>1) When the OS stagnates like the MacOS did for >>so long, it's just natural that when it got >>better, it would be leaps and bounds better. >>Look at the difference in quality between >>Windows 9x and 2000/XP
>>2) XP is quite a bit better than 2000.
While your first comment was right, your second comment was based on speculation. The 2 OS's are apples and oranges.(No pun intended) 2000 and XP are based on the same NT 5 Kernel, not much difference. There is some, but mainly "cosmetic" differences. It's the Lucky Charms version of Win2000.
I state all this based on being a SysAdmin for the past 4 years, and running every version of Winblows out there. Just for the record...my iBook will be in tomorrow. I just switched my job to doing Graphics & Video editing, and i'm glad to have joined the Apple Team. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
[quote]While your first comment was right, your second comment was based on speculation.<hr></blockquote>
I suppose you missed where I talked about the specific portions of XP that are better than 2000.
[quote]The 2 OS's are apples and oranges.<hr></blockquote>
Which two OS's?
[quote]2000 and XP are based on the same NT 5 Kernel, not much difference. There is some, but mainly "cosmetic" differences. It's the Lucky Charms version of Win2000.<hr></blockquote>
Two operating systems can be light years different, and still be based on the same kernel. Again, there are several things that make WinXP better than 2000, and none of them are related to the kernel. You're welcome to call it the lucky charms version all you want, but it makes it seem as though all you're capable of comprehending is the difference in colors.
I would argue that simply changing the UI (note, UI is not just the pretty colors) will give you a completely different OS. I consider the improvements made in XP's UI to be lightyears better than Windows 2000.
Comments
<strong>You can use != for does not equal and almost everyone who has had any programming experience in the last 15-20+ years will recognize that as pretty standard syntax.</strong><hr></blockquote>
!= = (does not equal sign) ?!?!?!? <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" /> <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
OOOHHH!! I thought it meant ! as in 4!=24 (as in something that is a whole lot bigger... IE Luna!=Aqua (luna * luna-1 * luna -2 until luna-x=1 = Aqua) )
OK, if anyone understood what I meant.. please tell me i'm not crazy...
the funny thing is that my "definition" actually made sence a lot of the time...
[ 05-25-2002: Message edited by: Paul ]</p>
<strong>Has anyone seen a Jaguar demo of scrolling text anywhere? Or dynamically resizing Finder windows of large directories? Those would show under the hood OS level speedups much more effectively than zoom-in/out or a whole bunch ot QT clips and transparent Terminal windows that show off just the compositing improvements.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Scrolling and other stuff could very well be faster with QE simply because the CPU isn't splitting time between doing the compositing and doing its "normal" functions. Depends on where the slowest/weakest link in the chain is (bus, cache, RAM, central processor, graphics processor, etc.) which is the whole point of the GPU requirement and the thread that was going earlier on the subject.
But AFAIK, there are some minor improvements in Quartz 2D drawing, but no major changes in its API.
<strong>
OK, if anyone understood what I meant.. please tell me i'm not crazy...
[ 05-25-2002: Message edited by: Paul ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
it's called a factorial - for too much detail go <a href="http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Factorial.html"; target="_blank">here</a>.
[ 05-25-2002: Message edited by: Paul ]</p>
>>2) XP is quite a bit better than 2000.
While your first comment was right, your second comment was based on speculation. The 2 OS's are apples and oranges.(No pun intended) 2000 and XP are based on the same NT 5 Kernel, not much difference. There is some, but mainly "cosmetic" differences. It's the Lucky Charms version of Win2000.
I state all this based on being a SysAdmin for the past 4 years, and running every version of Winblows out there. Just for the record...my iBook will be in tomorrow. I just switched my job to doing Graphics & Video editing, and i'm glad to have joined the Apple Team.
<strong>For those who want to know my PhD is in Medical Physics.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And here I was thinking it was just a mis-spelling of FUD
<strong>
And here I was thinking it was just a mis-spelling of FUD
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I suppose you missed where I talked about the specific portions of XP that are better than 2000.
[quote]The 2 OS's are apples and oranges.<hr></blockquote>
Which two OS's?
[quote]2000 and XP are based on the same NT 5 Kernel, not much difference. There is some, but mainly "cosmetic" differences. It's the Lucky Charms version of Win2000.<hr></blockquote>
Two operating systems can be light years different, and still be based on the same kernel. Again, there are several things that make WinXP better than 2000, and none of them are related to the kernel. You're welcome to call it the lucky charms version all you want, but it makes it seem as though all you're capable of comprehending is the difference in colors.
I would argue that simply changing the UI (note, UI is not just the pretty colors) will give you a completely different OS. I consider the improvements made in XP's UI to be lightyears better than Windows 2000.