Christian247
Apr 15, 01:55 PM
looks like an iphone casket.
Awesome!!!
Awesome!!!
Philberttheduck
Oct 3, 06:19 PM
I expect the iPhone and Full screen iPod before Christmas.
JAT
May 4, 10:26 AM
That's the joke.
On a more serious note, not really. I was trying to think of something other than web browsing. I have a HTPC that I cobbled together that takes care of that.
It's basically the ultimate "access" machine. Just yesterday I used my phone as a dictionary, store, terminal to enterprise software, link to external contact database. (also made some phone calls) iPad would be similar. Lookup, lookup, lookup. Web browsing is covered under that, too.
One thing the iPad brings that any phone cannot is a level of professionalism. In the companies I deal with, using your phone during a meeting looks questionable, like you're fooling around. Using a tablet or laptop to do the exact same lookup of whatever would be ok. It's a little silly, but that's the vibe I get currently.
This is not to say everyone has use for it. I'm happy with the phone, I'm not in that many meetings.
On a more serious note, not really. I was trying to think of something other than web browsing. I have a HTPC that I cobbled together that takes care of that.
It's basically the ultimate "access" machine. Just yesterday I used my phone as a dictionary, store, terminal to enterprise software, link to external contact database. (also made some phone calls) iPad would be similar. Lookup, lookup, lookup. Web browsing is covered under that, too.
One thing the iPad brings that any phone cannot is a level of professionalism. In the companies I deal with, using your phone during a meeting looks questionable, like you're fooling around. Using a tablet or laptop to do the exact same lookup of whatever would be ok. It's a little silly, but that's the vibe I get currently.
This is not to say everyone has use for it. I'm happy with the phone, I'm not in that many meetings.
Benjy91
Apr 7, 11:38 AM
According to Wikipedia, Windows 8 will be NT version 6.2, not 7.0 - just in case you were wondering.
Thats what I said.. I didnt say it would be NT 7.0
Thats what I said.. I didnt say it would be NT 7.0
more...
GeekLawyer
May 3, 10:52 PM
When I hear “It’s just getting started,” that signals to me there is more to come. Which implies that patience will be rewarded. Which further implies to wait for future models....I get your meaning. I hear "it's just getting started" like the Macintosh was just getting started in the mid-80s. I see it a little more expansively than any one model. It's about the next epoch in information technology getting underway.
notjustjay
Apr 21, 12:02 PM
I think I'd prefer a system where only upvotes ("likes") are allowed (e.g. Engadget). That way you can still see who's got the most positive/popular posts while not opening it up quite so much to abuse or the negative connotations associated with a negative score.
Another forum I visit (RedFlagDeals) has a similar system where people can be "thanked" for particular posts, and then their user profile shows how many times in total people have thanked them. It helps show who is the most helpful or who has a good reputation for providing useful advice.
Another forum I visit (RedFlagDeals) has a similar system where people can be "thanked" for particular posts, and then their user profile shows how many times in total people have thanked them. It helps show who is the most helpful or who has a good reputation for providing useful advice.
more...
kalsta
Apr 30, 12:15 PM
I don't get why everybody hates this UI change - I personally think it looks a lot better and people will not get confused:).
Do you mean you like the change, or the reverse of the change?
You only have to look at the second screen shot to see why the slider was potentially confusing�
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg
When there are only two options, the inactive option looks a lot like a depressed button.
Apple's always fiddling with this. You have to wonder why they didn't just stick with the old tabbed interface, which is arguably the most instantly recognisable way of switching window views. I guess there's a bit more flexibility in buttons, in terms of their placement� or maybe they're just trying to think different.
Do you mean you like the change, or the reverse of the change?
You only have to look at the second screen shot to see why the slider was potentially confusing�
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/29/162642-lion_subpane_slider_old_500.jpg
When there are only two options, the inactive option looks a lot like a depressed button.
Apple's always fiddling with this. You have to wonder why they didn't just stick with the old tabbed interface, which is arguably the most instantly recognisable way of switching window views. I guess there's a bit more flexibility in buttons, in terms of their placement� or maybe they're just trying to think different.
wiz7dome
Aug 15, 12:16 PM
I just bought the 23 inch several days ago. My serial is 2A6251XXXXXX and it shows up with a june 2006 production date. Like the earlier poster, it is very bright and I also turned it down a little. I also turned the color down to Thousands instead of Millions as a psychological trick for when i need it. Now after reading the pink hue replies (which i totally forgot about) I can't tell if i have a pinkish hue or if its my own paranoia.
1. Does anyone have a pic or example of the Pinkish hue?
2. Is there a way to test or tell which 23" model you have?l
1. Does anyone have a pic or example of the Pinkish hue?
2. Is there a way to test or tell which 23" model you have?l
more...
QCassidy352
May 3, 11:01 PM
IMO, until the ipad gets this, which is entirely possible, it will remain more of a toy than a tool, and all these commercials will be nothing but fodder for the haters.
there's nothing wrong with toys, and this is a nice one, but these lines about doctors, CEOs, etc., are just plain ridiculous.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and yours is wrong.
-Dave Barry
there's nothing wrong with toys, and this is a nice one, but these lines about doctors, CEOs, etc., are just plain ridiculous.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and yours is wrong.
-Dave Barry
infidel69
Mar 28, 02:48 PM
What exactly is a 'hater'? Someone that disagrees with the company line? Someone with a dissenting opinion?
Consultant is the opposite of a hater which is just as bad really. Apple can do no wrong in his eyes, I think he's in love with Steve Jobs or something.
Consultant is the opposite of a hater which is just as bad really. Apple can do no wrong in his eyes, I think he's in love with Steve Jobs or something.
more...
Lord Blackadder
Aug 3, 11:20 AM
While that part is true that we would burn more fuel at power planets one advantage you are forgetting about is the power planets are by far much more efficient at producing power than the internal combustion engine on your car. On top of that it is much easier to capture and clean the pollution the power planet produces over what the cars produce. On top of that we can easily most our power over to other renewable choices.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
I agree with you that series hybrids gain efficiency by running the internal combustion engine at a narrow RPM range representing the engine's most efficient speed. It's been done for over a hundred years that way in generators and a series hybrid drivetrain is set up exactly the same way as a generator.
Power plants are usually more efficent per unit of energy than autos, but right now they do not have the capacity to support a big switch to electrics. Also, the notion that power plants are cleaner than cars is debatable - many are, but many are not all that clean.
The critical point is, our power grid needs to become FAR more robust (more, bigger power plants) before we can make a large-scale switch to electrics - and it will only be worthwhile if the power grid becomes significantly more efficient. It can be done, but it will take a long, long time - and probably have to involve a significant new construction program of nuclear power plants.
I heard it that the reason why BMW stopped selling diesel cars in the US was that the engines failed, due to the very poor quality. In Europe, you can get quality fuel, but in the US, diesel is still the fuel of trucks, primarily.
Just one statistics: in continental Europe (not in the UK), new diesel cars have been outselling petrol ones for almost a decade, despite the premium.
The US began transitioning to ultra-low sulphur diesel in and by now the transition is nearly complete. The new fuel standard brings us in line with European diesel. Before the credit crunch recession hit, many car manufacturers were planning to bring Eurpoean-market diesel cars over here in slightly modified form, but those plans were scuppered in the recession. Subaru, for example, has delayed the introduction of their diesel by a year or two.
But I think diesels will start arriving here in the next couple years, and people will buy them in increasing numbers. The USA is 40 years behind in the adoption of diesel passenger cars.
You shouldn't have any impression about Subarus. They really have the traction of a train (AWD ones, of course - why would you buy anything else?!), but everything else is just midrange quality at best.
I've had a 1998 Impreza estate several years ago and it was OK. Recently, I've had a 2007 Legacy Outback from work. Nice glass on the top and good traction, but I have no intention of trading a BMW or Mercedes for it the next time. The interior is low quality and Subaru has no understanding of fuel efficiency, it seems. OK, it's a 2.5L engine, automatic and AWD, but still... 25 imperial mpg?!
It's not really fair to compare a Subaru to a BMW or Merc though, is it? Those German luxury cars are much more expensive and the AWD variants are even more expensive still. A 5-series with AWD will cost 70%-80% more than a roughly equivalent Legacy. They are very different carsm with totally different customers in mind.
I have a 2000 Forester currently. Mechanically they are well-made cars, they have a strong AWD system and I like the ride quality over rough roads, which they handle much better than the Audis I've driven.
Their biggest weaknesses are only average fuel economy (by US standards; I get about 28 mpg combined), and average interior quality, especially in the Impreza and Foresters, though I have seen the latest models and they are much better. The 2.5L four is really a great engine in a lot of ways, but it's just not quite fuel efficient enough, and in my car that problem is exacerbated by the short-ratio gearbox, which is crying for a 6th gear.
Hybrids actually have an equal to worse carbon footprint than regular gasoline engine cars due to the production and disposal process of the batteries. As such, they are not green at all. They are just another one of these ****** feel good deals for hippies with no brains an engineering knowledge.
I disagree. Real hippies don't work and thus can't afford fancy hybrids.
Of the commercially available cars, a well designed diesel, able to operate on biodiesel from waste oil for example has by far the best carbon footprint or an ethanol burner that can work on ethanol fermented from plant waste via cellulose digesting bacteria.
I would prefer if we could get to the point where we either have cars running on ethanol generated from cellulose or keratin digestion or natural gas buring engines.
Unfortunately fuel cells are not that great either because of the palladium used in the batteries that is pretty toxic in production as well.
Cheers,
Ahmed
The problem with biodiesel is that it's far too scarce to adopt widely. Sure, it's great that Joe Hippie can run his 1979 Mercedes 300D wagon on fast food grease, but once everyone starts looking into biodiesel Joe Hippie won't be getting free oil handouts anymore.
Also, biodiesel demand has already started competing with food production and I can tell you right away I'd rather eat than drive.
You're right about fuel cell carbon footprints - but that's the least of their worries now because they still cost a fortune to make and have short useful lives, making them totally unpractical to sell.
So far the biggest problem is not getting internal combustion engines to burn alternative fuels (we've found many alternative fuels) but to produce enough alternative fuel and distribute it widely enough to replace petroleum - without interrupting things like food production or power generation.
AppleMacDudeG4
May 4, 06:33 PM
They forgot to include if you ask us whether you can buy one in an Apple store, we would say "order online".
Otherwise nice commercial.
Otherwise nice commercial.
more...
iBug2
Apr 29, 02:12 PM
And people kept telling me that OSX and iOS weren't going to merge in any meaningful manner for years ahead, if ever. Yeah right. I'd bet the one after this has them nearly fully merged and I mean towards iOS for the most part. OSX will be dumbed down to the lowest common brain cell and you won't be able to get free/open software anymore. It'll have to come through the App Store or not at all. Wait and see. That is the point I'll be moving on.
This will happen eventually, but not just with Apple. All commercial OS's will go "closed". But not in 2-3 years, more like 10-15 or so. Your only chance for an open OS will be stuff like Linux then.
Anyway, I've already said too much. :)
This will happen eventually, but not just with Apple. All commercial OS's will go "closed". But not in 2-3 years, more like 10-15 or so. Your only chance for an open OS will be stuff like Linux then.
Anyway, I've already said too much. :)
carlgo
Sep 28, 09:56 PM
Simple designs have indeed existed for thousands of years, but most of the McMansions going up aren't like that, more like castle imitations. These people have all the money in the world and access to the best architects and designers to build something memorable and they end up getting a McCastle that the Beverly Hillbillys would like.
So, good for Jobs for having some taste and building something worthwhile.
And, yes, there will be a secret ATT antenna buried in the walls so Jobs will think his reception is normal.
I would have a turntable in front of the garage. You can devote less space to the driveway area. A water feature too. Any sign of solar? It is still a big house and will use a lot of energy no matter what.
So, good for Jobs for having some taste and building something worthwhile.
And, yes, there will be a secret ATT antenna buried in the walls so Jobs will think his reception is normal.
I would have a turntable in front of the garage. You can devote less space to the driveway area. A water feature too. Any sign of solar? It is still a big house and will use a lot of energy no matter what.
more...
Corndog5595
Dec 4, 08:02 PM
My list of maps and how much I like them on a scale of one to five:
selena gomez and justin bieber
more...
justin bieber kisses a guy.
pics of justin bieber kissing
Justin+ieber+kissing+a+
Reacent Post
KnightWRX
Mar 7, 10:45 AM
Perhaps. You may well be right. But the point was that Apple was the first to seriously use USB and the first to remove floppy drives -- so they get to take the credit for "being innovative", and when everyone else follows suit, whether they were actually being copycats or for whatever other reason, they get credit for "being the leader" and "everyone copies them".
USB was an Intel initiative, not an Apple one. It was all over the tech news if you read PC rags back then, way before the Bondi blue plastic was a pipe dream at Apple.
And adopting someone else's interconnect and removing an internal floppy drive is innovative how ? Especially the removing part...
USB was an Intel initiative, not an Apple one. It was all over the tech news if you read PC rags back then, way before the Bondi blue plastic was a pipe dream at Apple.
And adopting someone else's interconnect and removing an internal floppy drive is innovative how ? Especially the removing part...
more...
SRSound
Oct 3, 11:11 PM
Two things I would love:
1: Smartphone/mini computer (blackberry style or even as advanced as the Sony UX180P (http://www.mobiletechreview.com/sony_ux180/Sony-Vaio-UX180P.htm)) that operates on a lite version of OS X.
2: Octo-core Mac Pros BEFORE this happens! Like, you know, late october, early novemberish...
I'm a dreamer :)
1: Smartphone/mini computer (blackberry style or even as advanced as the Sony UX180P (http://www.mobiletechreview.com/sony_ux180/Sony-Vaio-UX180P.htm)) that operates on a lite version of OS X.
2: Octo-core Mac Pros BEFORE this happens! Like, you know, late october, early novemberish...
I'm a dreamer :)
inkswamp
Oct 3, 04:00 AM
Ug, I can't believe I just defended a monopoly.
Bear in mind, there is nothing inherently bad in a company having a monopoly, not even Microsoft. What's bad (and illegal) is when a company in such a position abuses its monopolistic power. I have to remind MS defenders of this fact as many of them don't seem to grasp the nuance here. MS wasn't in trouble for being a monopoly (rightly so--being one is not illegal.) MS was in trouble for abusing that power.
Speaking of MS defenders, is it my imagination or are there an awful lot of Macrumors newbies on the board now who seem to bash Apple pretty quickly and at every turn? What's that all about?
Bear in mind, there is nothing inherently bad in a company having a monopoly, not even Microsoft. What's bad (and illegal) is when a company in such a position abuses its monopolistic power. I have to remind MS defenders of this fact as many of them don't seem to grasp the nuance here. MS wasn't in trouble for being a monopoly (rightly so--being one is not illegal.) MS was in trouble for abusing that power.
Speaking of MS defenders, is it my imagination or are there an awful lot of Macrumors newbies on the board now who seem to bash Apple pretty quickly and at every turn? What's that all about?
samcraig
May 2, 12:28 PM
Well I find it funny that people are actually defending something Apple admitted to being a bug. Intentional or not - Location Services was supposed to be user selectable.
That's no conspiracy theory. It's a simple concept that doesn't need Apple to educate anyone on. Even toddlers grasp the concept of on and off.
I also, personally, don't like being talked down to by Jobs/Apple whenever they have a press conference. The whole angle of "oh.. it's our fault for not educating the consumer" is PR crap and deflection.
"It Just Works".... unless it's the location services switch. Whoops ;)
That's no conspiracy theory. It's a simple concept that doesn't need Apple to educate anyone on. Even toddlers grasp the concept of on and off.
I also, personally, don't like being talked down to by Jobs/Apple whenever they have a press conference. The whole angle of "oh.. it's our fault for not educating the consumer" is PR crap and deflection.
"It Just Works".... unless it's the location services switch. Whoops ;)
DewGuy1999
Apr 13, 09:50 PM
Lockware Systems (http://www.lockwaresystems.com/swanm10b-179.html)
So, on the left side of the above linked page it says they're $120 and on the right side of the same page it says they're $140! So, which is it?
So, on the left side of the above linked page it says they're $120 and on the right side of the same page it says they're $140! So, which is it?
holmesf
Apr 30, 05:02 AM
No, it'll happen whether we like it or not....
Nope, it won't happen at all. There is too big of a market for people who write and rely on custom software. I don't disagree that the friendly face of the OS will continue to get dumbed down. The backend, however, will remain just as open and customizable. Go look at any University and you'll find that in the CS dept a huge portion of the professors and their students use Mac OS X. Restrict this market and you drive away future developers. It would be suicidal.
Nope, it won't happen at all. There is too big of a market for people who write and rely on custom software. I don't disagree that the friendly face of the OS will continue to get dumbed down. The backend, however, will remain just as open and customizable. Go look at any University and you'll find that in the CS dept a huge portion of the professors and their students use Mac OS X. Restrict this market and you drive away future developers. It would be suicidal.
Corndog5595
Dec 10, 07:21 PM
As mentioned, the spawning is terrible. IMO worse than in MW2 (which seemed hard to believe at first)
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
Then you get those times when you want to spawn near enemies, and you find yourself sprinting for 5 minutes just to get killed once you get to where you're going.
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
Then you get those times when you want to spawn near enemies, and you find yourself sprinting for 5 minutes just to get killed once you get to where you're going.
NebulaClash
May 4, 08:46 AM
That one thing that I don't see is Google sponsored Android commercials... they are not promoting their own product like MS did with Windows and are leaving each hardware manufacturer to make up their own image. All of this gives the average consumer a confusing, scattered message of the Android OS.
That's a good point. We really don't see many ads from Google in general.
This is speculation, but I remember those stories last summer about how Android is a temporary thing for Google but Chrome is their future. This gets shot down hard any time it gets mentioned around here, but I can certainly see this as a possibility. One thing Google is famous for is starting something only to abandon it once they decide to focus in other areas. And Chrome is at the heart of their corporate mission -- getting people to stay online in the cloud where they can be monetized. Android also gets the ad revenue, so it might indeed stick around for practical reasons, but the app model is the very model Google hates for it gets people offline and perhaps using some service other than what Google provides. With Chrome, Google would have full control. With Android it's a free-for-all.
So perhaps this is why Google doesn't bother advertising Android that much. It's nice to have, but it's not considered the future at Google.
That's a good point. We really don't see many ads from Google in general.
This is speculation, but I remember those stories last summer about how Android is a temporary thing for Google but Chrome is their future. This gets shot down hard any time it gets mentioned around here, but I can certainly see this as a possibility. One thing Google is famous for is starting something only to abandon it once they decide to focus in other areas. And Chrome is at the heart of their corporate mission -- getting people to stay online in the cloud where they can be monetized. Android also gets the ad revenue, so it might indeed stick around for practical reasons, but the app model is the very model Google hates for it gets people offline and perhaps using some service other than what Google provides. With Chrome, Google would have full control. With Android it's a free-for-all.
So perhaps this is why Google doesn't bother advertising Android that much. It's nice to have, but it's not considered the future at Google.
superfula
Apr 29, 05:09 PM
You're mixing up your kernels. NT 4.0 doesn't share a kernel with 95/98, NT 3.51 doesn't share a kernel with Windows 3.x...
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
No, smitty was correct. MS uses version numbers that identify it's code. It's how software devs can write code that decides whether the app should be allowed to install.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
No, smitty was correct. MS uses version numbers that identify it's code. It's how software devs can write code that decides whether the app should be allowed to install.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
0 comments:
Post a Comment