Does not mean the presentation was good. Especially if you listen to the random aplausing that went on it sounds like the presentation was aimed at consumers and idiots more than at programmers. For a start it lacked any explination why stuff was faster, and why the OS was smaller. It also lacked explenation of any of the differences between the OSes for programmers.
It briefly explained what made it faster (rewriting Finder in Cocoa, updating WebKit and a better JS compiler, 64 bit, etc), but they obviously didn't have a year to spare going on about shit that no one cares that deeply about just because some random guy could pick a bone with them otherwise. They also mention why the OS was smaller; they removed some outdated libraries, rewrote some core stuff, and did some better compression. Finally, it mentions GCD, OpenCL,
and proper 64 bit, which is hardly "no difference between the OSes for programmers."
Not at all, I still almost always use features which have existed for over 10 years. Infact there are not many more fetures that are useful for home use they could possiably ever event. Also different UIs are stupid, they should stick to a standard and not try and invent new stuff, afterall they uttered all that shit in the presentation, infact thats my only complaint with office 2007 is that the UI should be like 2003/2000/1998 and not some funky new crap.
Funny that people want innovation but resist change, isn't it? In ten years I wouldn't be surprised if you have forgotten about how "great" the old Office layout was and like the new one (or the new-er one that they may invent in the future). In addition, the UI does not change hugely; notice how, for example, he mentions that although Finder is rewritten from scratch it is almost exactly the same UI-wise (The only differences being live previews and the icon magnify, to my knowledge).
Can you explain how mac defragments and when? Atleast with windows you can without having to search the internet or user manual. Also this seriously will fuck the crap out of SSDs, as defragmenting is one of the worst things you can do to them, or are you saying it automatically detects if something is being stored on solid state and does not defragment it (if so then that was an important fact they missed up atleast in the first half).
I have never done extensive research into OS X defragmenting as I don't really care.
Yes I have to admit its confusing to set up on vista as it reports that it is set up yet is not. However your serches are solved in a couple of seconds (if drive is not active) atmost.
Once they copied Spotlight, their searches became as fast... if the computer was doing nothing? I rest my case.
Yes, as atleast last time I checked OpenGL does not support general purpose processing on GPUs (which DX11 does on any DX10 GPU from all venders)
That's what OpenCL is for...
and certainly does not support tessilisation shaders which Ati's new cards do. Also people from the dolphin emulator site (a gc/wii emulator for PC) say that OpenGL is slower than DX9, which could be due to different plugin structures but they say is most likly due to slower CPU instructions (as each instruction for the GPU has to be issued through the driver for the graphic card via the CPU).
Sure, it doesn't support every new feature which one vendor only supports, but if the feature turns out to matter then it will. In addition, note how in the wiki article it comments that OpenGL appearing slower on Windows systems had to do with poor Windows-side, and
not OpenGL-side implementation, as when they made one which removed the components of Windows that it interfaced with it was on par at least with DX.
I could sware you said that the WC3 update took hellishly long the other day.
Because I was running on my crappy campus wifi? It's funny how you are trying to blame OS X for what cannot be explained by anything other than internet issues... Do you seriously have no actual evidence to back your claims up?
Also this is if the games even run in the first place, many future titals which use only DX10/11 will not do so well until open GL shapes up to standards (which mac for some reason loved saying all the time). Do not bring dual booting into this as a solution as all systems support that and it gives results crediting to another OS.
Shapes up to standards, what? OpenGL is widely used—don't just assume that DX is
the library just because MS made it. Notice how the PS 3 and the Wii use OpenGL?
However you can not trust wikipedia, especially poorly made articles like that.
Yes, yes I can trust Wiki (at least on non-controversial articles, and that is certainly not controversial).
It mises any benchmark tests or proffs to back it up.
It backs its arguments up with plenty of references. You don't even back up yours with anything.
Anyway the fact is OpenGL has yet to nativly support DX10 / 10.1 features fully (although it can be made to via extensions acording to an article from that wiki page) and currently has no plans to ever support offically DX11 feautres like improved threading model, 3 new shader types and the ability to run non graphic massivly parralel calculations on any graphic card.
All in all it is not a clear cut which is better and which is not.
So after all that going on about features that it isn't clear anyone actually cares about you finally admit it isn't worth trying to argue that DX is significantly better than OpenGL because it really doesn't appear to be?
