To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
@rhetoric.sendmemoney: Actually I just happened to post my comment very late and noticed that you had covered similar points
@tylerdurden: Vista's getting DX11 "for free". XP can't run DX10+ because the driver model has changed. Also; there are significant number of upgrades from Vista to Win7. Yes, interface *does* matter. It's what sells any upgrade.. Mac, Windows, hell even open-source
@NathanHill:
>>I think we just disagree then. I see this as huge possible improvements in functionality and end user delight. I am an end user, and I think Snow Leopard looks great, especially because of the little things that it will do better.<<
How the heck does the end-user see any difference? It's new APIs and greater speed. It's not a (significant) revamp of interface, nor of the kernel.
Secondly; it being 32-bit OS is a setback, not a feature..




Member since:
2006-01-22
Vista was also, in a sense, a developmental upgrade -- it featured hardware-accelerated WPF, DX10, a new audio stack, a new printing system, the list goes on..
BUT it wasn't an incremental upgrade. Instead it was an unoptimized and unfinished OS which is why it failed to get a comparatively sufficient market. It's nowhere a failure like Windows ME (and Vista's still more PCs than mac). That's my take anyway..
That's pretty much exactly what I am saying.
Now, if these API's are needed for app development then the home user should not have to pay for them. When will these killer apps come out anyways? Will they be widely user by the next OSX version? When I get a new game in the Windows world, I just upgrade DX for FREE. Why should I have to pay YEARLY to run the latest apps? I would bet a lot of developers won't shove this down peoples throats until AT LEAST the next OSX update.
Forced APIs are not value added by themselves.