All well and good, I'm saying any developments are going to have to
work AROUND the windows operating system, they won't be somehow
inspired by windows.
I remember playing games in DOS that used a mouse pointer and icons.
Remember back then Windows wasn't even a true operating system, it was
just a DOS shell.
A good OS is easy to use and transparent. It doesn't help if a large
chunk of resources are required to run just the OS, which is doing
the same stuff it did ten years ago, just with prettier graphics.
The thing that drives consumer hardware development are games.
GAMES (and other consumer media like DVDs and HD media) use
those more powerful chips and memory. People don't buy giant
computers or expensive consoles to have a pretty OS, they do it
so that their flashy new games will run smoothly (or so that they
can play those flashy new games they've had their eyes on).
Your basic package of a word processor, spread sheet, calculator,
web browser, calendar, planner, clock, email... don't require much power.
That's what 99% of people are using their
computers for other than for games. Even throwing in a basic movie player
and sound recorder isn't that big a deal. Most people aren't using their
computers to render stuff for hours and hours or use it as a server.
Instead they rent those things.
Now where M$ (or whoever else would be dominating the market
by hook or by crook), makes most of their money off of contracts
with business and government. That's a separate thing. The servers
need the memory, but they don't need massive video card hardware,
etc. Maybe design companies, but until recently at least they've
been nearly all Mac driven. Anyway, I'm getting off topic.
I think the point I was trying to make is, that insisting that we
aren't forced to change to more and more bloated OSes every 5-7
years just to "keep up with the times" is not insane, and it's not
anti-innovation. M$ and everyone else is trying to turn a profit,
I understand that. It's just no fun to be a gamer when all you
want to do is PLAY that dang games, and these companies
are out to make it as difficult as possible if you don't have
infinite money to burn. Eventually it's going to hurt them,
because people won't take it forever. I think they realize that
now and that's why they keep selling us stripped down PCs
with bare bones OSes in the form of those little boxes we
call "consoles." It's a pity they get all the attention
because PC games have vastly more potential than they do.
It's just that the PC seems like it will always be a working
machine that just happens to be able to play games, sort
of like the Playstation 2 is a gaming console that just happens
to be able to play movies. But a gig of ram (these days) for an OS is
just ridiculous. It's like having a gold plated toilet seat.
It's just not necessary. I'd rather have that gold put to better
Last edited by Kurgan; 01-11-2012 at 02:13 AM.