Originally posted by binaryDigit
Not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you asking for a PC config that is similar to a PowerMac config and then looking at the price? I wouldn't be surprised that you would end up paying pretty close to the PM after adding 802.11g, Gb ethernet, and Bluetooth. At least a lot closer than what some PC folk would claim. But in any case, we were never talking about that. We were talking about "innovation" and I just pointed out that quite a bit of the hardware in current PMs originated in the PC world. What type of "experience" are you referring to? How many years of experience do you have? How do you know how much experience I do? Just because I actually successfully use Wintels and you don't, therefore I can't be as big of a user as you?
I'm trying to say that Wintel companies were and still play it and safe... For the masses they have the low end stuff and even when you WANT to buy advanced stuff most of them do not offer them... When you want advanced features mostly you custom build your own solution therefore YOU the user is the one who innovates and NOT the Wintel platform in general... And just because stuff originated from Wintel world that doesn't neccesary means that Wintel in general innovates... For example they still aren't abandoning the PS/2, com, lpt, floppy, BIOS, IRQs, etc in order to go ahead with something better
As for succesfully using Wintels, you know what? Good for you... I not only use them but fix them as well... Software, hardware wise and then some... Maybe you too! In any case that doesn't matter! Because in the end I have the access on fixing Macs too and I know that both in using and fixing a Mac everything is just so damn easier... I still wait even for the most advance offerings from the Wintel world to be even close to Macs overall... If you think otherwise I cannot say anythink to convince you! You have your experiences, I have mine...
True, I just started using XP at work two weeks ago. Personally I think the interface sucks, I have most of the XP features turned off and use classic mode. But why would I want to change when Win2K has worked so well?
I cannot dissagree to that because frankly I find the Windows 2000 platform (all Win2K products) to be more mature and stable compared to newer products like XP and 2003 Server... However, based on my profession I get the chance to use everything even if I don't like to do so
No I don't doubt it, I know it. If you read my reply I said that the iMac popularized the port, though pc's shipped with the port first. Are you saying I'm incorrect, if not, what is the purpose of the flat world remark? And would you care to be more specific about the second part? Exactly what did I say that was "wrong" to lead to your second statement. It would help things if you would address specific issues vs making generalizations.
You previously said:
"What the iMac DID do was to create a market for these peripherals and accelerated the adoption of usb"
This is not the case... The USB on the Wintel pre-iMac era was just a port on the Wintels and even most of them DIDN'T have it... You had to go on more exotic mainboards in order to have it... The majority of companies pre-iMac didn't even care... Then all of a sudden post-iMac EVERY single Wintel company wanted to offer USB solutions... Therefore iMac not only accelerated the adoption but actually introduced and continously showed how cool USB actually is... And if you prefer iMac actually taught them how to build and support USB solutions... Damn, even the majority of USB Wintel products looked like iMac too!
Isn't even from M$? M$ originally wrote OS/2. IBM didn't take over development until after the "rift". 3.0 was the first version that IBM released on their own.
No, it isn't! It was a joint OS solution with IBM which M$ actually dropped from before even v2.0 of OS/2 not 3.0... v3.0 of OS/2 just took OS/2 to a whole new level! And this shows what ANY company can do if it hasn't M$ to hold them back... And yes, we all know that OS/2 3 and 4 do even nowadays things that Windows still CANNOT do... Still, too many fixpacks to handle
As for the icon modification, take a look at the clock app. When you minimize it, you have the ability to have it show a miniature version of the clock face. This is actually very simple to do, as when you get the message telling you to minimize, you can grab the window handle of the icon window, then you're free to do whatever you want. One of the apps actually showed a miniature version of the document that you were working on, though I can't remember off hand which app it was. I'll take a look and see if I can find more info for you.
Come one BinaryDigit... This is isn't across the OS/2 functions and is barely like the universal OS X's minimize funtion... It is like saying that Dock is the same thing like OS/2 v3 launchbar!
