Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 15th Jun 2012 21:16 UTC
Windows This rumour has been rummaging around the web for a few days, but now that The New York Times has picked it up, it probably carries a bit more validity than it did before. Microsoft invited members of the press to a mystery event coming Monday, and supposedly, the company will launch its very own ARM tablet running Windows RT.
Thread beginning with comment 522713
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by kovacm on Mon 18th Jun 2012 18:52 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
kovacm
Member since:
2010-12-16

It's like "and more the rule than the exception" just wasn't there ...but I guess it's again about salivating at the company you worship now (while curiously brushing aside the failure - just one among many such - of your past darling, judging from avatar)

yes, Microsoft with mindless IT "experts" manage to proclaim PC as way to go.

This is mistake. Windows 95 bring to PC everything that we have for many years on other platforms. Even applications.

After Windows 95 we have nothing new for 10 years!

...until Apple, only company that still have software and hardware under same roof, present iPhone.

and today, 5 years after iPhone, Microsoft will try to challenge Apple with his own hardware (this happened before: Zune).

and yes, Alan Kay was right: you can not separate software and hardware, if you do so, you will not be able to moving things forward.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by zima on Mon 18th Jun 2012 22:04 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, you do like fantasies.

PC taking over had nothing to do with MS "proclaiming" it. In the real world things don't happen just because you "proclaim" them. Fantasies you worship, to have tidy & controllable world, don't become true by "proclamation".

The PC approach was simply by far the best path, that's why it crushed virtually all the other* - also why it was the one which succeeded in the stated goal of Gates and MS, to make computers widely available, widespread (or maybe you want a return to those glorious times when very few had them, when you could feel special?).
And Windows was the most viable choice of the OS, at the time ( http://www.osnews.com/permalink?522221 ).


*including Apple hardware - but you're too far gone, seemingly unable to assimilate the info that Apple hardware platforms failed, and they switched to the tech of PC world - Macs are PCs now. You can't understand that, as far as influence on software goes, Apple hardware (also mobile) is now generic - again, Kay certainly wasn't talking about industrial design.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by kovacm on Tue 19th Jun 2012 08:39 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
kovacm Member since:
2010-12-16


The PC approach was simply by far the best path, that's why it crushed virtually all the other* - also why it was the one which succeeded in the stated goal of Gates and MS, to make computers widely available, widespread (or maybe you want a return to those glorious times when very few had them, when you could feel special?).
And Windows was the most viable choice of the OS, at the time ( http://www.osnews.com/permalink?522221 ).

this is most laughable part: Bill Gates is responsible that every house have computer - it was inevitably. Bell was only very lucky to have PC operating system monopoly position right from start.

anyway, today you have Apple that stomp all over Microsoft with software + hardware product, in new category and Microsoft can not fight back with "software only" + OEM approach.

that was point: if you do software and hardware under same roof you will make superior product.

*including Apple hardware - but you're too far gone, seemingly unable to assimilate the info that Apple hardware platforms failed, and they switched to the tech of PC world - Macs are PCs now. You can't understand that, as far as influence on software goes, Apple hardware (also mobile) is now generic - again, Kay certainly wasn't talking about industrial design.

Apple start to use PC components when they become "good enough".

Apple design, together with Motorola, AltiVec (SSE like) instructions to hardware accelerate (among other things) composite desktop. Intel chips get comparable SSE only few years later.
And you can apply same logic on everything else: they start to replace SCSI with IDE when IDE get DMA mod.
they replace NuBus slots with PCI (skiping ISA junk), same goes to EFI...

yes, in past 20 years PC standards improved and Apple accept one by one.

Reply Parent Score: 1