Sign In
Register
Help
mdawson said:
> Biallystock wrote:
>
> Please explain how, now the Mac is basically a PC, Apple has managed to make PC Graphics Cards incompatible?
By making this statement you prove that you know absolutely nothing about computer hardware or the relationship between Macs and graphics cards. Firstly, all Macs are and have always been PCs as that acronym simply means personal computer. What has changed is that Macs now use Intel processors. That stated, Macs are still completely different systems from the cookie-cutter PCs that Dell, HP, Gateway, et al., assemble and churn out. If you had actually been paying attention to PC design 30 years ago when hundreds of incompatible PCs ran on less than 10 unique CPUs, or knew anything about computers to begin with, you could understand that very simple premise.
Apple designs their computer from the ground up and implements or removes technologies as they see fit. No Mac has ever been guided by the whims of some ATX/BTX motherboard manufacturer that insists on wasting board resources and space on obsolete ports?most Wintel PCs still have PS/2, RS-232c serial and IEEE-1284 Centronics parallel ports?, implementing technologies late?every new Ethernet standard from the original protocol up through gigabit Ethernet has been a standard feature on Mac motherboards long before they are standard on ATX/BTX boards?or not at all?most Wintel PCs lack FireWire 400 and none have built-in FireWire 800.
As to graphics cards, Apple does not make PC graphics cards incompatible with Macs, the graphics card OEMs do. It is the latter that make the decision to make the card they sell only compatible with Wintel PCs not Apple. Even if all graphics cards did have cross-platform firmware, Apple writes the drivers, again, because the GPU OEMs do not. Apple does not by any means have the resources to write drivers for every graphics card on the market.
>
> Please explain how, now the Mac is basically a PC, Apple has managed to make PC Graphics Cards incompatible?
By making this statement you prove that you know absolutely nothing about computer hardware or the relationship between Macs and graphics cards. Firstly, all Macs are and have always been PCs as that acronym simply means personal computer. What has changed is that Macs now use Intel processors. That stated, Macs are still completely different systems from the cookie-cutter PCs that Dell, HP, Gateway, et al., assemble and churn out. If you had actually been paying attention to PC design 30 years ago when hundreds of incompatible PCs ran on less than 10 unique CPUs, or knew anything about computers to begin with, you could understand that very simple premise.
Apple designs their computer from the ground up and implements or removes technologies as they see fit. No Mac has ever been guided by the whims of some ATX/BTX motherboard manufacturer that insists on wasting board resources and space on obsolete ports?most Wintel PCs still have PS/2, RS-232c serial and IEEE-1284 Centronics parallel ports?, implementing technologies late?every new Ethernet standard from the original protocol up through gigabit Ethernet has been a standard feature on Mac motherboards long before they are standard on ATX/BTX boards?or not at all?most Wintel PCs lack FireWire 400 and none have built-in FireWire 800.
As to graphics cards, Apple does not make PC graphics cards incompatible with Macs, the graphics card OEMs do. It is the latter that make the decision to make the card they sell only compatible with Wintel PCs not Apple. Even if all graphics cards did have cross-platform firmware, Apple writes the drivers, again, because the GPU OEMs do not. Apple does not by any means have the resources to write drivers for every graphics card on the market.
Now apparently Macs are PCs, apparently that actually means Personal Computer, evidence of mdawson's innermost knowledge of the industry.
Your replies are absolute evidence of your inability to think independently. Let alone understand the workings of engineering design. Laughably it is the entire GPU industry that conspires against Apple design to make it incompatible! But somehow Apple's enormous design talents that make a tiny few graphics cards work despite their efforts to not fall in line with Apple's secret engineering! Amazingly those cards are essentially the same as the cards those same GPU manufacturers make for the PC market.
The failings of Wintels to comply with Apple are numerous. Wintel PCs lack FireWire, an Apple standard, yet when Apple omits it off its own hardware or reduces it to one port in 7 this, I assume, is more evidence of its natural brilliance.
As only you know, PCs waste resources on "obsolete" ports that allow PC users to notoriously be able to keep and reuse their hardware and run it for many more years than Mac users. You yet again reveal how only you know Apple's leads the industry in Ethernet technology. Almost as much lead as it has provided in cpus, graphics cards, RAM, buses, Hard Drives, CD-R, multi-button mice, Blu ray, server technology etc. Even standards such as UniCode which it eventually, partially implemented in OSX 10.2.3 by which time it had become part of the old "wasted resources" of Windows and UNIX for many years.
Quote
> Biallystock wrote:
>
> And yet NeXT and OSX ran on PCs for years before Apple let on.
And? Apple had an x86 test bed in order to perform parallel development of OS X in case they needed to switch processor lines, as they eventually did. Apple has never intended, stated or implied that they were developing an open operating system that would run on any PC. The Intel-based Macs that finally made it to market starting in 2006 are not Wintel PCs nor or they compatible with them.
>
> And yet NeXT and OSX ran on PCs for years before Apple let on.
And? Apple had an x86 test bed in order to perform parallel development of OS X in case they needed to switch processor lines, as they eventually did. Apple has never intended, stated or implied that they were developing an open operating system that would run on any PC. The Intel-based Macs that finally made it to market starting in 2006 are not Wintel PCs nor or they compatible with them.
NEXT (then Rhapsody, then OSX) had run on PCs for yonks, as had BeOS, as has UNIX. Apple's development efforts then had to go into differentiating it enough so it didn't just run on a standard PC. Intel-based Macs are so not Wintel PCs that all it takes is a tiny program, Boot Camp, to bypass Apple's boot up and make it boot up Windows.
Apple brags about this and even has claimed to be the fastest PC running Vista, but apparently this you don't know.
Quote
> Biallystock wrote:
>
> All of the above are just excuses for Apple's choices.
No one has to make excuses for Apple?s choices. Apple owns the products. Apple owns the platform. Therefore, Apple and only Apple has the right to decide in what direction their products and platform will move.
>
> All of the above are just excuses for Apple's choices.
No one has to make excuses for Apple?s choices. Apple owns the products. Apple owns the platform. Therefore, Apple and only Apple has the right to decide in what direction their products and platform will move.
Glad you volunteered for the job so readily then.
Quote
> Biallystock wrote:
>
> The only hard part has been making sure that the retail OSX won't run on off the shelf PCs.
Apple did not have to make sure of anything. The shipping Universal Binary versions of OS X are designed to operate on either legacy PowerPC Macs or x86 hardware that did not exist prior to the start of Intel Mac development circa 2005. But again, you are completely ignorant about hardware and cannot get yourself past the false pretense that a Mac is just another Wintel PC.
>
> The only hard part has been making sure that the retail OSX won't run on off the shelf PCs.
Apple did not have to make sure of anything. The shipping Universal Binary versions of OS X are designed to operate on either legacy PowerPC Macs or x86 hardware that did not exist prior to the start of Intel Mac development circa 2005. But again, you are completely ignorant about hardware and cannot get yourself past the false pretense that a Mac is just another Wintel PC.
See above.
Quote
> Biallystock wrote:
>
> Glad to hear that Apple has never deliberately in all its history made incompatible hardware and software. Not even with their own products!
Right, because the Wintel world is the pinnacle of backward compatibility.
>
> Glad to hear that Apple has never deliberately in all its history made incompatible hardware and software. Not even with their own products!
Right, because the Wintel world is the pinnacle of backward compatibility.
Right. So exactly how many radical changes of incompatible Architecture and software has Wintel undergone. How many times have Wintel users had to pay for entirely new computer architecture to then have to work in emulation? How many times have Wintel users had to pay for upgrades to major expensive software for no other reasons than that it was now crippled and ran slower on their brand new computers?
So once again you show that you know absolutely nothing on the subject, and if you had only actually been paying attention, you wouldn't have shown how completely ignorant you are under the false pretense of being some kind of an expert.
MultiQuote
