Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 21st Jan 2009 11:30 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems We've been able to drop the world of 32bit for a while now, with 64bit processors and support for them being prevalent in all popular, modern operating systems. However, where Mac OS X and Linux seem to make the move to 64bit rather effortlessly, Windows has more problems. Even though 32bit applications should run fine on 64bit Windows, some don't; and to make matters worse, drivers need to be 64bit, as there's no support for 32bit drivers in 64bit versions of Windows. Still, Gizmodo claims that with Windows 7, the time is right to take the plunge. But really, is it so? And why do Linux and Mac OS X seem to handle the transition so much easier?
Thread beginning with comment 344804
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26


Well, maybe you should take your own advice. ;) Note the two different spellings/uses of "people's" in your post.


You're exaggerating somewhat. The spelling and usage are the same however I just hadn't included an apostrophe in the first instance.

However this is irrelevant as you've somewhat missed my point. I wasn't out to correct the previous post but rather make a point (by example) that nobody appreciates a language pendant - particularly when the error is such a minor one.

Maybe I should have been more direct in my original post but I thought what did was politer than simply mod'ing down ;)

Edited 2009-01-21 20:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

mounty Member since:
2005-12-12

politer ???

This one will run and run !

Reply Parent Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

politer ???

This one will run and run !


I doubt that:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/politer
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/politer

Being dyslexic - I made sure I spell-checked before posting ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

perral1 Member since:
2005-07-12

And I think you both fail to realize that the original correction made was for the sake of pointing out something funny - that "remarkable little problems" is far, far different than "remarkably little problems". malfarot was not necessarily pointing out the mistake for the sake of pointing out the mistake, but rather for the sake of pointing out something humorous.

To summarize: *whoosh*

Reply Parent Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

And I think you both fail to realize that the original correction made was for the sake of pointing out something funny - that "remarkable little problems" is far, far different than "remarkably little problems". malfarot was not necessarily pointing out the mistake for the sake of pointing out the mistake, but rather for the sake of pointing out something humorous. To summarize: *whoosh*


I got his 'joke' - I found it pedantic and not funny.

Anyway, I think this tangent has ran on long enough now.

Reply Parent Score: 2