[CS-FSLUG] OS/2 Anyone?

[Nathan T.]

Timothy Butler wrote:
> 	Apple actually has quite a good history with backwards  
> compatibility. Until the Intel switchover, you could run most apps  
> written since at least System 7, if not even older stuff.
>
> 	Most Mac OS X 10.0 era stuff will still run too. Apple has shifted  
> some stuff around in the last few years, but has not really broken  
> backwards compatibility.
Microsoft hasn't done too bad in this arena either, at least until 
Vista. I'll give Apple this, the majority of the software from before 
the switch to Intel will run through Rosetta, but the difference in 
performance and the increased heat output from my MacBook bothers me 
when it does this. I've waited too long for a version of Photoshop 
Elements that runs natively on the Intel Macs and there has been no 
delivery.

Sure, there's a difference between having programs run slower and not 
running at all, but I've only had compatibility problems with Vista when 
it came to software that integrated into the core components of the 
operating system (think antivirus and Acronis True Image). I understand 
where people are coming from when they say it's not the same thing, 
because the differences are of a different nature and maybe importance; 
however, the end-user frustration is the same.

Vista comes with an adjustment period for their new security features, 
there are definitely elements which require more polish, the security 
features really do need to be made more transparent, it's biggest flaw 
is that it requires a fair sized budget for more powerful hardware 
(lucky me I work at a computer store), and of course some older pieces 
of hardware and software don't work with it; however, most people are 
judging the whole based on the 32 bit version, and based on first 
impressions. Give it some time and it will gradually become more 
accepted, especially when people no longer have the option of buying 
Windows XP and have to either upgrade, or make themselves comfortable in 
Linux or Mac OS X.

I don't think we can honestly say that with the release of Vista there 
will be some sort of mass migration to Linux. If that were true then it 
would have happened when people were complaining that the newfangled 
Windows XP wasn't half as good as Windows 2000 and 98 which it was 
replacing. Some people will shift around, but if Windows is familiar to 
them then odds are the majority will stop exploring after a while and 
reluctantly come back.