Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 4th Feb 2009 07:05 UTC
Permalink for comment 347320
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-08-12
A few people have mentioned that newer versions of Windows, etc. require newer hardware and ask how this is any different?
The difference is generally you only require newer hardware for a "proper" experience, with Apple you often just plain need new hardware. You'd be surprised how far under the system "requirements" you can go with Windows XP, the only roadblock is your sanity. Apple has the habit of propping up actual walls with armed guards.
The problem being my idea satisfactory of performance may be different from that of Apples, and I shouldn't be forced to upgrade just so they can maintain the perfectly uniform gated community.