----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: uv8.8410@fx15.iad>
a091631f
@REPLY: 3@dont-email.me> 3cc97b3e
@REPLYADDR RabidPedagog <rabid@pedag.og>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 RabidPedagog
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-References:
1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <knhjs4FokktU2@mid.individual.net> 1@paganini.bofh.team>
<0001HW.2AC4F5620000D6097000008C32CF@news.eternal-september.org> 1@dont-email.me> <knk7ghF73klU4@mid.individual.net>
2@dont-email.me> 1@dont-email.me> <knllcmFecn7U1@mid.individual.net>
1@dont-email.me> <0001HW.2AC646C6001CD8927000006B72CF@news.eternal-september.org>
<knmundFl0ppU2@mid.individual.net> 1@paganini.bofh.team> <0HGRM.329263$ZXz4.303092@fx18.iad>
1@dont-email.me> Hih7.57774@fx11.iad> 1@dont-email.me>
1@news.samoylyk.net> <knphajF39egU1@mid.individual.net> 4@dont-email.me>
1@dont-email.me> q0k.107@fx34.iad> 1@dont-email.me>
Lmc1.8154@fx44.iad> 2@dont-email.me> _f1.6958@fx06.iad>
3@dont-email.me>
@RFC-Message-ID:
uv8.8410@fx15.iad>
@TZUTC: -0400
@PID: Betterbird (Windows)
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
On 2023-09-30 2:23 p.m., Alan wrote:
> On 2023-09-30 11:16, RabidPedagog wrote:
>> On 2023-09-30 2:09 p.m., Alan wrote:
>>> On 2023-09-30 10:39, RabidPedagog wrote:
>>>> On 2023-09-30 10:26 a.m., sms wrote:
>>>>> On 9/30/2023 6:05 AM, RabidPedagog wrote:
>>>>>> I see more potential from the Mx processors than I do from the
>>>>>> x86-64 platform. Some might not mind the fact that they need twice
>>>>>> the amount of RAM, a much bigger battery and powerful fans to get
>>>>>> the same kind of performance, but I do. I don`t see myself buying
>>>>>> another PC once this one becomes obsolete.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Mx processors are excellent in performance/watt. Alas, many
>>>>> commercial, industrial, educational, medical, business, and
>>>>> engineering software programs are x86 only. Running them in a
>>>>> virtual machine, or via remote access, is not a great solution.
>>>>>
>>>>> From University of Colorado (most universities have similar
>>>>> warnings):
>>>>> "Many engineering applications only develop versions that are
>>>>> available on the Windows operating system. Students with Mac
>>>>> computers can access these applications by leveraging our remote
>>>>> access tools."
science-6>.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps if the Mac gains more market share, like 20-25% then this
>>>>> situation will change. In 4Q22 Macs hit a peak of 17.2% after being
>>>>> as low as 10.2% in 1Q21. But now it`s fallen to 13.3%
share-apple/>.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now I`m on a project where we really want one of of our
>>>>> sub-contractors to use Solidworks but he uses a Macbook and can`t
>>>>> run it. So he`s using some other 3D modeling program which is not
>>>>> nearly as capable, even though in the past he used Solidworks.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, during my time in the ZephyrusG14 forum on Reddit, there were
>>>> quite a few threads of people who bought the machine over the
>>>> MacBook they really wanted simply because their university program
>>>> required x86-specific software. There`s even a guy selling his
>>>> MacBook Air M2 on eBay, not too far from where I live, most likely
>>>> because he quickly realized that as fantastic as the machine is,
>>>> there just isn`t as much software for the Mac as there is for the
>>>> PC. Even in the early 2000s, I was fixing up an old man`s Pentium 3,
>>>> and I learned that he was a Mac die-hard since it was released. When
>>>> I inquired why he finally went for a PC, I learned that the guy
>>>> loved walking into a computer store and buying random programs, but
>>>> that there was less and less for the Mac (which was true at the time).
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, I find that the Mac equivalents of programs I use on the
>>>> PC are actually nicer.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yup. The early 2000s were a period of significant rebuilding for the
>>> Mac as a consumer platform.
>>>
>>> Remembering that Mac OS X was first released in 2001, and a lot of
>>> software developers would have been questioning whether or not it
>>> would be a good idea to continue developing for the new OS.
>>>
>>> Since then, macOS has quintupled its share of the personal computer
>>> OS market.
>>>
309>
>>>
>>> It`s a good thing for Windows stats that there are parts of the world
>>> where Macs aren`t affordable for large swathes of the population...
>>>
-202309>
>>>
>>> ...and that a lot of Windows "personal computers" are sold for
>>> non-personal usage.
>>>
>>> ?
>>
>> I can say that Mac OS X didn`t have the right kind of hardware to run
>> it at the time. I actually purchased an iBook G3 600 with 128MB RAM
>> back then. It came with Mac OS X but retained Mac OS 9.2.2 for
>> compatibility purposes. With the default hardware, Mac OS X was
>> unbearable. Even after maxing out the RAM to 640MB, it wasn`t much
>> better. I was actually encouraged to just use Mac OS 9.2.2. On the G4
>> PowerBook I purchased to replace it (G4 1GHz 1GB RAM), it was mostly
>> fine but nothing special. I don`t think that the operating system got
>> the kind of hardware it deserved until it switched to the G5 processors.
>>
>
> I think it was probably a combination of the early Mac OS X being far
> from optimized AND better processors, but yeah.
>
> All of it left developers hesitant to invest resources in rewriting for
> Mac OS X... ...and of course that`s why Apple kept the "Classic
> Environment" (which also hurt performance of course) as well as the
> Carbon API.
For what it`s worth, Mac OS 9.2.2 ran beautifully on the G3 iBook. Of
course, by the time I got a Mac, the operating system was already being
phased out. I think I would have enjoyed using it in the 90s had I not
been forced into the PC platform.
--
RabidPedagog
TG: @RabidPedagog
Galatians 6:7
--- Betterbird (Windows)
* Origin: blocknews - www.blocknews.net (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441