|
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/18/11 15:03 , John Smith wrote:
On 10/18/2011 11:47 AM, D Peter Maus wrote: On 10/18/11 11:58 , John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 5:18 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote: On 10/17/11 20:04 , Howard Brazee wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:41:08 -0700 (PDT), RHF wrote: Friends Don't Let Friends Buy Apples/Macs. Friends let friends be their own people, making their own choices. The world needs more friends. Hey....making sense, here. Cut it out. Real friends sit they PC down besides the Mac users equipment and give them a demonstration ... one picture is worth 10,000 words ... Regards, JS Your needle is stuck. Seems like that, but fact is, the truth simple never changes ... people just keep trying to float BS ... Regards, JS Not everything you disagree with is BS. More importantly, who uses which computer operating system is really about as unimportant an argument as things get. The output is the same. The output is what matters. How one gets there has to do with choices based on priorities intrinsic to the individual. Your priorities and your choices create no incumbency on anyone but yourself. Further which O/S is better depends on application and the users' needs. Again, only the output matters. And PC World did a very interesting article a year or so ago, so you can, in fact, look it up, (and they did an update again, this year,) in which they compared Apples to PC's point for point on performance, and found that to purchase the same performance that comes standard in an Apple, a PC user would have to spend, while buying the most cost effective solutions available at the time, nearly $1000 more than the price of the Apple. And they found this to be true of notebooks AND desktops. So, again, not everything you disagree with is BS. And your needle is still stuck. D. Peter Maus. Chicago. And some of the World. memberfdic. |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/18/2011 1:13 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 12:30 PM, RHF wrote: On Oct 18, 9:58 am, John wrote: On 10/18/2011 5:18 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote: On 10/17/11 20:04 , Howard Brazee wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:41:08 -0700 (PDT), RHF wrote: Friends Don't Let Friends Buy Apples/Macs. Friends let friends be their own people, making their own choices. The world needs more friends. Hey....making sense, here. Cut it out. Real friends sit they PC down besides the Mac users equipment and give them a demonstration ... one picture is worth 10,000 words ... Regards, JS Apple-holics 'Know' with a certainty that MACs are very "pc"*, and lowly PCs {The Machine} are not. -apple/macs-are-creative-tools-for-the-ennobled- -while-ms/pcs-are-simply-machines-for-the-masses- * 'pc' politically correct and elitist** ** 'i' am an Educator {in Education} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC -or- ** 'i' am Creative {in the Arts etc...} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC . Apple/MAC : A Statement of "Who I Am" -versus- MS/PC : A Statement of "What I Do" -result- Fashion Over Form-&-Function . . What I seen was bill gates become very obstinate and think that that there was no need for video as powerful as the computers ... MAC video graphic artists where forced into being ... now that windows went ahead and provided the supporting software/driver support, there is no finer video than you will find on PC's ... and the leading reason all no. one games usually only run on the PC, and windows ... to transcode them for another architecture/video support cuts too many capabilities from the game. Windows didn't "go ahead" and do that, John. The companies that build the graphics cards provide the drivers. As for your "too many capabilities from the game" claim... ...let's see a concrete example. Actually, it is windows that supports the hardware, if they don't, anyone can write as many drivers as they wish ... the OS would simply not be able to utilize it ... yet another post which blatantly outlines your refusal to cure your ignorance ... but your complete willingness to comment on things you know little, or even nothing, about. Gates saw a world where a simple video chip on a motherboard would be sufficient ... his vision changed. Regards, JS |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
In article ,
John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:13 PM, Alan Baker wrote: In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 12:30 PM, RHF wrote: On Oct 18, 9:58 am, John wrote: On 10/18/2011 5:18 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote: On 10/17/11 20:04 , Howard Brazee wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:41:08 -0700 (PDT), RHF wrote: Friends Don't Let Friends Buy Apples/Macs. Friends let friends be their own people, making their own choices. The world needs more friends. Hey....making sense, here. Cut it out. Real friends sit they PC down besides the Mac users equipment and give them a demonstration ... one picture is worth 10,000 words ... Regards, JS Apple-holics 'Know' with a certainty that MACs are very "pc"*, and lowly PCs {The Machine} are not. -apple/macs-are-creative-tools-for-the-ennobled- -while-ms/pcs-are-simply-machines-for-the-masses- * 'pc' politically correct and elitist** ** 'i' am an Educator {in Education} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC -or- ** 'i' am Creative {in the Arts etc...} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC . Apple/MAC : A Statement of "Who I Am" -versus- MS/PC : A Statement of "What I Do" -result- Fashion Over Form-&-Function . . What I seen was bill gates become very obstinate and think that that there was no need for video as powerful as the computers ... MAC video graphic artists where forced into being ... now that windows went ahead and provided the supporting software/driver support, there is no finer video than you will find on PC's ... and the leading reason all no. one games usually only run on the PC, and windows ... to transcode them for another architecture/video support cuts too many capabilities from the game. Windows didn't "go ahead" and do that, John. The companies that build the graphics cards provide the drivers. As for your "too many capabilities from the game" claim... ...let's see a concrete example. Actually, it is windows that supports the hardware, if they don't, No, you are completely incorrect. Windows supports the driver architecture that the hardware manufacturer must write their driver's to comply with. anyone can write as many drivers as they wish ... the OS would simply And anyone can. They may not want to, but they can. not be able to utilize it ... yet another post which blatantly outlines your refusal to cure your ignorance ... but your complete willingness to comment on things you know little, or even nothing, about. The irony in this statement is off the charts... Gates saw a world where a simple video chip on a motherboard would be sufficient ... his vision changed. Again, Microsoft doesn't write the drivers: the hardware manufacturers do. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/18/2011 3:57 PM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:
On 10/18/11 5:35 PM, John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:21 PM, D Peter Maus wrote: ... Not everything you disagree with is BS. More importantly, who uses which computer operating system is really about as unimportant an argument as things get. The output is the same. The output is what matters. How one gets there has to do with choices based on priorities intrinsic to the individual. Your priorities and your choices create no incumbency on anyone but yourself. That is the most ignorant BS I have ever seen, at least it equals the worst I have ever seen ... it is the person operating the equipment which is the only concern, really ... sit a physicist from CERN next to a hick newsgroup reader who is a government clerk and you can see the truth in action. Further which O/S is better depends on application and the users' needs. Again, only the output matters. The best OS will be the one which supports the full spectrum of uses, can be used by a child in elementary school as well as the physicist at CERN, encompassing the entertainment industry, fast fourier transform, etc. And, the OS which runs of the most up-to-date, is updated the most frequently, used by the largest number (data sharing without translation), etc. simply sinks it home. Not only is the PC there, it almost always has been ... If that crapola you just posted was true, we'd all be using it. But Windows and most other desktop OS's represent a set of compromises so they can do what they do in a mostly good fashion. There are and continue to be, other OS's that are better suited to some particular task but they don't get in the news and aren't used by many. And PC World did a very interesting article a year or so ago, so you can, in fact, look it up, (and they did an update again, this year,) in which they compared Apples to PC's point for point on performance, and found that to purchase the same performance that comes standard in an Apple, a PC user would have to spend, while buying the most cost effective solutions available at the time, nearly $1000 more than the price of the Apple. And they found this to be true of notebooks AND desktops. So, again, not everything you disagree with is BS. Yeah, they compared a mid-power PC to a MAC ... my nephews blows them out of the water ... and, if it the article I am viewing, the comparison is to a 400 Mhz processor on the PC, and single core to boot! The PC is superior to MAC in many if not most ways ... but that can ONLY be appreciated by the people which run them ... or, simply, I would not ask a garbage collector for "his opinion" ... Yeah OK, good fodder from a gamer! That's who the whole tech world really listens to... Fact is, soon as you buy a MAC, you are going to find out here are tons of applications and hardware which is not supported and is beyond your use ... ever ... Most all of which you won't actually care about, that is IF you even knew of the problem. For the vast majority of users, the OS isn't all that big a deal. People are the ONLY importance ... the computer is just a tool ... Regards, JS Even more insane BS ... as anyone purchasing a MAC, and using software for demanding tasks (well, even video games, for that matter), will shortly find out ... If you don't need a powerful computer, you can probably get by with a MAC and remain ignorant to the differences ... that is like, DUH MAN! roflol Or, simply, why buy a Peterbilt if everything you haul fits in your pickup ... Regards, JS |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/18/11 6:06 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 10/18/2011 3:57 PM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote: On 10/18/11 5:35 PM, John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:21 PM, D Peter Maus wrote: ... Not everything you disagree with is BS. More importantly, who uses which computer operating system is really about as unimportant an argument as things get. The output is the same. The output is what matters. How one gets there has to do with choices based on priorities intrinsic to the individual. Your priorities and your choices create no incumbency on anyone but yourself. That is the most ignorant BS I have ever seen, at least it equals the worst I have ever seen ... it is the person operating the equipment which is the only concern, really ... sit a physicist from CERN next to a hick newsgroup reader who is a government clerk and you can see the truth in action. Further which O/S is better depends on application and the users' needs. Again, only the output matters. The best OS will be the one which supports the full spectrum of uses, can be used by a child in elementary school as well as the physicist at CERN, encompassing the entertainment industry, fast fourier transform, etc. And, the OS which runs of the most up-to-date, is updated the most frequently, used by the largest number (data sharing without translation), etc. simply sinks it home. Not only is the PC there, it almost always has been ... If that crapola you just posted was true, we'd all be using it. But Windows and most other desktop OS's represent a set of compromises so they can do what they do in a mostly good fashion. There are and continue to be, other OS's that are better suited to some particular task but they don't get in the news and aren't used by many. And PC World did a very interesting article a year or so ago, so you can, in fact, look it up, (and they did an update again, this year,) in which they compared Apples to PC's point for point on performance, and found that to purchase the same performance that comes standard in an Apple, a PC user would have to spend, while buying the most cost effective solutions available at the time, nearly $1000 more than the price of the Apple. And they found this to be true of notebooks AND desktops. So, again, not everything you disagree with is BS. Yeah, they compared a mid-power PC to a MAC ... my nephews blows them out of the water ... and, if it the article I am viewing, the comparison is to a 400 Mhz processor on the PC, and single core to boot! The PC is superior to MAC in many if not most ways ... but that can ONLY be appreciated by the people which run them ... or, simply, I would not ask a garbage collector for "his opinion" ... Yeah OK, good fodder from a gamer! That's who the whole tech world really listens to... Fact is, soon as you buy a MAC, you are going to find out here are tons of applications and hardware which is not supported and is beyond your use ... ever ... Most all of which you won't actually care about, that is IF you even knew of the problem. For the vast majority of users, the OS isn't all that big a deal. People are the ONLY importance ... the computer is just a tool ... Regards, JS Even more insane BS ... as anyone purchasing a MAC, and using software for demanding tasks (well, even video games, for that matter), will shortly find out ... If you don't need a powerful computer, you can probably get by with a MAC and remain ignorant to the differences ... that is like, DUH MAN! roflol Or, simply, why buy a Peterbilt if everything you haul fits in your pickup ... Regards, JS If you weren't playing games all the time, you'd know that most of the big gains in the last 2 years are really being wasted. -- Lloyd |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/18/2011 4:55 PM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:06 PM, John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 3:57 PM, Lloyd E Parsons wrote: On 10/18/11 5:35 PM, John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:21 PM, D Peter Maus wrote: ... Not everything you disagree with is BS. More importantly, who uses which computer operating system is really about as unimportant an argument as things get. The output is the same. The output is what matters. How one gets there has to do with choices based on priorities intrinsic to the individual. Your priorities and your choices create no incumbency on anyone but yourself. That is the most ignorant BS I have ever seen, at least it equals the worst I have ever seen ... it is the person operating the equipment which is the only concern, really ... sit a physicist from CERN next to a hick newsgroup reader who is a government clerk and you can see the truth in action. Further which O/S is better depends on application and the users' needs. Again, only the output matters. The best OS will be the one which supports the full spectrum of uses, can be used by a child in elementary school as well as the physicist at CERN, encompassing the entertainment industry, fast fourier transform, etc. And, the OS which runs of the most up-to-date, is updated the most frequently, used by the largest number (data sharing without translation), etc. simply sinks it home. Not only is the PC there, it almost always has been ... If that crapola you just posted was true, we'd all be using it. But Windows and most other desktop OS's represent a set of compromises so they can do what they do in a mostly good fashion. There are and continue to be, other OS's that are better suited to some particular task but they don't get in the news and aren't used by many. And PC World did a very interesting article a year or so ago, so you can, in fact, look it up, (and they did an update again, this year,) in which they compared Apples to PC's point for point on performance, and found that to purchase the same performance that comes standard in an Apple, a PC user would have to spend, while buying the most cost effective solutions available at the time, nearly $1000 more than the price of the Apple. And they found this to be true of notebooks AND desktops. So, again, not everything you disagree with is BS. Yeah, they compared a mid-power PC to a MAC ... my nephews blows them out of the water ... and, if it the article I am viewing, the comparison is to a 400 Mhz processor on the PC, and single core to boot! The PC is superior to MAC in many if not most ways ... but that can ONLY be appreciated by the people which run them ... or, simply, I would not ask a garbage collector for "his opinion" ... Yeah OK, good fodder from a gamer! That's who the whole tech world really listens to... Fact is, soon as you buy a MAC, you are going to find out here are tons of applications and hardware which is not supported and is beyond your use ... ever ... Most all of which you won't actually care about, that is IF you even knew of the problem. For the vast majority of users, the OS isn't all that big a deal. People are the ONLY importance ... the computer is just a tool ... Regards, JS Even more insane BS ... as anyone purchasing a MAC, and using software for demanding tasks (well, even video games, for that matter), will shortly find out ... If you don't need a powerful computer, you can probably get by with a MAC and remain ignorant to the differences ... that is like, DUH MAN! roflol Or, simply, why buy a Peterbilt if everything you haul fits in your pickup ... Regards, JS If you weren't playing games all the time, you'd know that most of the big gains in the last 2 years are really being wasted. I don't know, my wife is fascinated with the algorithms exploiting the chaos theory and the "unreal number set" (An imaginary number is any number that is the product of a real number and the square root of negative one (-1)). She doesn't think the printing out and giving away of TONS of these things is a wasted ... indeed, "they" actually have the gonads to call it "art!" I call it a waste of ink ... but I do see trees, snowflakes, elves ears, corn cobs, mushrooms, leaves, demon faces, etc. in the drawings ... and I don't have to smoke pot to see 'em, that is a plus! Regards, JS |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
In article ,
John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:41 PM, Alan Baker wrote: In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:13 PM, Alan Baker wrote: In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 12:30 PM, RHF wrote: On Oct 18, 9:58 am, John wrote: On 10/18/2011 5:18 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote: On 10/17/11 20:04 , Howard Brazee wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:41:08 -0700 (PDT), RHF wrote: Friends Don't Let Friends Buy Apples/Macs. Friends let friends be their own people, making their own choices. The world needs more friends. Hey....making sense, here. Cut it out. Real friends sit they PC down besides the Mac users equipment and give them a demonstration ... one picture is worth 10,000 words ... Regards, JS Apple-holics 'Know' with a certainty that MACs are very "pc"*, and lowly PCs {The Machine} are not. -apple/macs-are-creative-tools-for-the-ennobled- -while-ms/pcs-are-simply-machines-for-the-masses- * 'pc' politically correct and elitist** ** 'i' am an Educator {in Education} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC -or- ** 'i' am Creative {in the Arts etc...} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC . Apple/MAC : A Statement of "Who I Am" -versus- MS/PC : A Statement of "What I Do" -result- Fashion Over Form-&-Function . . What I seen was bill gates become very obstinate and think that that there was no need for video as powerful as the computers ... MAC video graphic artists where forced into being ... now that windows went ahead and provided the supporting software/driver support, there is no finer video than you will find on PC's ... and the leading reason all no. one games usually only run on the PC, and windows ... to transcode them for another architecture/video support cuts too many capabilities from the game. Windows didn't "go ahead" and do that, John. The companies that build the graphics cards provide the drivers. As for your "too many capabilities from the game" claim... ...let's see a concrete example. Actually, it is windows that supports the hardware, if they don't, No, you are completely incorrect. Windows supports the driver architecture that the hardware manufacturer must write their driver's to comply with. anyone can write as many drivers as they wish ... the OS would simply And anyone can. They may not want to, but they can. not be able to utilize it ... yet another post which blatantly outlines your refusal to cure your ignorance ... but your complete willingness to comment on things you know little, or even nothing, about. The irony in this statement is off the charts... Gates saw a world where a simple video chip on a motherboard would be sufficient ... his vision changed. Again, Microsoft doesn't write the drivers: the hardware manufacturers do. Again, you prove yourself a fool, the high level drivers make the video calls to the devices ... the hardware manufactures simply have to translate those into assembly ... the same calls are made, but the firmware of the manufacturer translates those to fit its' hardware ... ATI will be much different the NVIDIA ... but windows makes the same calls from its high level driver(s) ... and, windows must provide what the game developers need, the instructions and calls, or it doesn't even get off the ground. Just because a video card slot exists on a motherboard DOES NOT mean windows has to support it ... It is the windows kernal which runs the games ... but hey, glad to be able to help you dispel your ignorance! :-) I'm sorry, but when you really don't know what you're talking about, you should just shut up. Create a video card, write drivers for it according to Windows published requirements and it will work... ....Microsoft doesn't have anything to do with it other than certifying the drivers after they've been written. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
In article ,
John Smith wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:13 PM, Alan Baker wrote: In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 12:30 PM, RHF wrote: On Oct 18, 9:58 am, John wrote: On 10/18/2011 5:18 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote: On 10/17/11 20:04 , Howard Brazee wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:41:08 -0700 (PDT), RHF wrote: Friends Don't Let Friends Buy Apples/Macs. Friends let friends be their own people, making their own choices. The world needs more friends. Hey....making sense, here. Cut it out. Real friends sit they PC down besides the Mac users equipment and give them a demonstration ... one picture is worth 10,000 words ... Regards, JS Apple-holics 'Know' with a certainty that MACs are very "pc"*, and lowly PCs {The Machine} are not. -apple/macs-are-creative-tools-for-the-ennobled- -while-ms/pcs-are-simply-machines-for-the-masses- * 'pc' politically correct and elitist** ** 'i' am an Educator {in Education} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC -or- ** 'i' am Creative {in the Arts etc...} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC . Apple/MAC : A Statement of "Who I Am" -versus- MS/PC : A Statement of "What I Do" -result- Fashion Over Form-&-Function . . What I seen was bill gates become very obstinate and think that that there was no need for video as powerful as the computers ... MAC video graphic artists where forced into being ... now that windows went ahead and provided the supporting software/driver support, there is no finer video than you will find on PC's ... and the leading reason all no. one games usually only run on the PC, and windows ... to transcode them for another architecture/video support cuts too many capabilities from the game. Windows didn't "go ahead" and do that, John. The companies that build the graphics cards provide the drivers. As for your "too many capabilities from the game" claim... ...let's see a concrete example. Tell you what, this will get you started on who sets the specs and defines the driver: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...4%28v=vs.85%29 .aspx I never said that Microsoft doesn't set specs or defining things. You, again, seem to have a real problem with semantics ... usually a problem for those with no or inadequate educations. "YOU can build a driver using the Visual Studio development environment, or YOU can build a driver directly from the command line using the Microsoft Build Engine (MSBuild). To build drivers for Windows Developer Preview, Windows 7, and Windows Vista, use Visual Studio and MSBuild. To build drivers for Windows XP, YOU must use the Windows 7 WDK and the Windows Build Utility (Build.exe)." Do you see that word that I've capitalized? To whom do you think Microsoft is referring with the word "YOU" in that paragraph? The person/people who "build a bridge" are those completing the design, engineering and plans ... so it is with anything ... it is not "the guy with the shovel." Your analogy is so flawed I cannot even begin. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
Missy Sippy Receives Final Payment in Microsoft Settlement.
http://www.GulfCoastNews.com Emma comes first. cuhulin |
(OT) Steve Jobs.
On 10/18/2011 6:13 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:41 PM, Alan Baker wrote: In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 1:13 PM, Alan Baker wrote: In , John wrote: On 10/18/2011 12:30 PM, RHF wrote: On Oct 18, 9:58 am, John wrote: On 10/18/2011 5:18 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote: On 10/17/11 20:04 , Howard Brazee wrote: On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:41:08 -0700 (PDT), RHF wrote: Friends Don't Let Friends Buy Apples/Macs. Friends let friends be their own people, making their own choices. The world needs more friends. Hey....making sense, here. Cut it out. Real friends sit they PC down besides the Mac users equipment and give them a demonstration ... one picture is worth 10,000 words ... Regards, JS Apple-holics 'Know' with a certainty that MACs are very "pc"*, and lowly PCs {The Machine} are not. -apple/macs-are-creative-tools-for-the-ennobled- -while-ms/pcs-are-simply-machines-for-the-masses- * 'pc' politically correct and elitist** ** 'i' am an Educator {in Education} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC -or- ** 'i' am Creative {in the Arts etc...} and use an Apple/MAC therefore 'i' and 'it' are better than you and your lowly PC . Apple/MAC : A Statement of "Who I Am" -versus- MS/PC : A Statement of "What I Do" -result- Fashion Over Form-&-Function . . What I seen was bill gates become very obstinate and think that that there was no need for video as powerful as the computers ... MAC video graphic artists where forced into being ... now that windows went ahead and provided the supporting software/driver support, there is no finer video than you will find on PC's ... and the leading reason all no. one games usually only run on the PC, and windows ... to transcode them for another architecture/video support cuts too many capabilities from the game. Windows didn't "go ahead" and do that, John. The companies that build the graphics cards provide the drivers. As for your "too many capabilities from the game" claim... ...let's see a concrete example. Actually, it is windows that supports the hardware, if they don't, No, you are completely incorrect. Windows supports the driver architecture that the hardware manufacturer must write their driver's to comply with. anyone can write as many drivers as they wish ... the OS would simply And anyone can. They may not want to, but they can. not be able to utilize it ... yet another post which blatantly outlines your refusal to cure your ignorance ... but your complete willingness to comment on things you know little, or even nothing, about. The irony in this statement is off the charts... Gates saw a world where a simple video chip on a motherboard would be sufficient ... his vision changed. Again, Microsoft doesn't write the drivers: the hardware manufacturers do. Again, you prove yourself a fool, the high level drivers make the video calls to the devices ... the hardware manufactures simply have to translate those into assembly ... the same calls are made, but the firmware of the manufacturer translates those to fit its' hardware ... ATI will be much different the NVIDIA ... but windows makes the same calls from its high level driver(s) ... and, windows must provide what the game developers need, the instructions and calls, or it doesn't even get off the ground. Just because a video card slot exists on a motherboard DOES NOT mean windows has to support it ... It is the windows kernal which runs the games ... but hey, glad to be able to help you dispel your ignorance! :-) I'm sorry, but when you really don't know what you're talking about, you should just shut up. Create a video card, write drivers for it according to Windows published requirements and it will work... ...Microsoft doesn't have anything to do with it other than certifying the drivers after they've been written. What a dumb asshole ... you'd better make yourself familiar with the windows device driver tools and their specs, moron ... Regards, JS |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com