Re: Beyond the hype - how good was BeOS?

[Jonathan de Boyne Pollard]

MBT> BeOS is still great compared to the NT line, IMHO, since
MBT> not only is it a graphical system natively, but it has a CLI
MBT> that has the power and ease of the UNIX command line.

This is going to be interesting.

Please explain how you think that Windows NT is not "a graphical system
natively", especially in light of what you later say in the very same
message about Windows NT having "graphics primitives in the operating
system kernel".

[Michael B. Trausch]

Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote in
<c1.01.31LBMD$5...@J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost> on Fri, June 16 2006 23:59:

I do believe that I was thinking something other then what I was typing at
the time, lol.

Windows NT was not natively designed to handle graphics-intensive tasks, at
least at first, and Be was quite a bit more efficient in
handling/addressing graphics, at least in my short experience with it.

Nowadays, Windows NT seems to handle stuff alright, so long as you aren't
running with the VESA driver (as is the default for unsupported cards with
XP, as well as the currently available beta of Vista).

In any case, I believe that I was thinking about something else at the time,
because I went back to read the post over again and it would seem that I
did contradict myself in that post...

- Mike

--
Registered Linux User #417338, machine #325045.

The three Rs of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.