1. copernicus's Avatar
    I don't know what to think about this.
    01-17-2007 03:30 PM
  2. KMeloney's Avatar
    I don't know what to think about this.
    Looks like you might not have read any of the replies to the initial blurb. It would appear that the initial poster's thoughts are, at least, very debateable, if not just wrong (based on the refuting that follows by people who appear to know a whole lot more about software/hardware architecture than I ever will or would ever care to).

    /< / /2 /<
    01-17-2007 04:00 PM
  3. bcaslis#IM's Avatar
    Stupid stuff. It runs OS X, but of course it's got to a scaled down version of the desktop version, just like WM5 is not a full desktop windows version.

    As for not putting in the public source:
    1.) They would only need to put in the underlying OS stuff. The OS X framework stuff is not open source and will never be. iPhone specific stuff could easily go there.
    2.) It's not shipping yet, duh! Don't need to put out source for unreleased products!
    01-17-2007 04:56 PM
  4. copernicus's Avatar
    Looks like you might not have read any of the replies to the initial blurb. It would appear that the initial poster's thoughts are, at least, very debateable, if not just wrong (based on the refuting that follows by people who appear to know a whole lot more about software/hardware architecture than I ever will or would ever care to).

    /< / /2 /<
    I read one of the comments (in effect calling it hogwash) but found the argument that OSX would not run on an ARM processor interesting (not sure of the accuracy nor the fine points of this though). I'll look again at the additional comments.
    01-17-2007 05:18 PM
  5. copernicus's Avatar
    Seems that, indeed, it is probably hogwash.
    01-17-2007 07:24 PM
  6. KMeloney's Avatar
    Seems that, indeed, it is probably hogwash.
    LOL Is it?! Believe me, I have NO IDEA if it's bunk or not -- 'cause that technical conversation is WAY over my head! It just seemed to me that perhaps the original post statement was an oversimplification (and a grope, too), and that folks who seemed to know a whole lot about it tended to agree with the debunking that followed.

    I appreciate your honesty. Very few people ever admit to needing to go back and get more info, and even fewer come back to say that they've changed their opinion.

    I just can't wait 'til this thing comes out so the we can KNOW what does/doesn't exist, and what it can and can't do. LOL

    /< / /2 /<
    01-18-2007 09:08 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD