RadioBanter - View Single Post

Tankfixer[_2_]

In article , - Howard Brazee
spouted !

On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:38:11 -0700, Tankfixer
wrote:

In article , - Howard Brazee
spouted !

On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 06:47:07 -0700, Tankfixer
wrote:

Mac's and the Apple operating system were so technologically superior
that Apple adopted the i86 processor and borrowed Linux as the core for
OS10

Apple had the power to start over. It could start over twice to
change to better CPUs. And it had the power to switch its core to
BSD Unix. Microsoft couldn't do this - it did not control the
design of PC compatible computers.

Oddly enough BSD Unix runs just fine on i86 based machines, doesn't it.

Sure. Which has nothing to do with anything I said.

Apple had to redesign it's architecture to use it's BSD/UNIX clone OS.
Microsoft didn't need to since it crafted it's OS to work with what PC
makers build.

When the environment changed from stand-alone desktop computers to
computers connected with the world, Microsoft had to keep tweaking its
core system again and again as it had to keep compatibility while
making it safe for the new environment. It's like shoring up an
existing building to make it earthquake resistant.

And no other OS company is continually improving their product ?

Huh? Again, what has that to do with what I said?

You imply that only Microsoft has to continually improve it's product.

There is an advantage in starting over using tools that other
companies have created - such as Unix. Unix has been improved over
the years and because it was designed for different purposes, it made
a safer core than simply improving the Mac operating system. Or
Windows. Since Apple controlled the hardware that its OS used, it
had the power to start over.

Maybe Windows had that power, maybe not - but Microsoft didn't go in
that direction. It would have lost a lot of customers who wanted
backward compatibility. Its primary customers are PC manufacturers.

Instead we have Apple who abandonded previous OS users.

Apple didn't need to shore up its OS in the same way. It tore down
the old structure and built its OS upon a new core that had been
proven to be better designed for connectivity (earthquakes).

These two ways of getting to the same result were necessary because
one was a hardware company and the other was a software company.