Apparently the A6 chip has dynamic clocking speeds. I don't think 2GB of RAM would do so much. And Unix was successful because it was cheap, not because it was great. Go read the Unix Haters Handbook (It was made free legally).
Sent from K48AP, the classic
Unix was far from cheap since Apple paid for a perpetual license and has done all development in house since then.
Can count on one hand how many OSes that don't have hater books on them. And all of them were mainframe OSes. Well there are Military OSes that have no books on them, but that is because they have never been seen by civilians. Plus I can't legally speak about them specifically :D. So a Unix hater book not only doesn't impress me, I would consider it the norm.
The Unix Haters handbook gives logical reasons on why Unix sucks (in that decade) because almost nothing worked properly. It's a nice read too, and if you're a *nix or unix user (OSX is officially Unix) then it's nice to know about it's history too. The early Unix' were cheap, what happened afterwards was that while FOSS started going huge, the propierty UNIX got in battle over standards and when the standards were developed, it became expensive to label your OS Unix.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull One
Sent from K48AP, the classic
Seriously. Microsoft was a Xenix shop to being with. And they wrote Windows so they didn't have to use it any more. Look how that turned it out. Most insecure OS in history. BTW I still have a working set of floppies for a Xenix install just to remind me of how good things used to be before Windows.
Their thought process back then was very clear. If everyone didn't have it, they didn't need to care about it. So back in the day when 150 and 300 baud modems were the norm and maybe 1 out of every 1000 PCs had one, they didn't want to care. That line of thought lasted until 2001. And by then it was to late because they had already designed Windows 2000's Ring 0, 1/2 and 3 so poorly that they didn't know how to fix it much less how to do it right even if they went back to the drawing board. BTW, they finally got a clue with Windows 7.
The burden you speak of was brought upon them by them because they never learned from the past or could even remotely predict the future. Just look at how long it took them to make Windows Phone 8 and Surface if you want any conclusive proof that they don't understand how to deal with the future much less react to the present.
And supporting legacy hardware would be easy if they wrote proper code. Linux distributions today still work on PCs built over a decade ago because they understand how to do it right.
BTW, Install Windows 8 over Windows XP and watch what happens to your installed Programs. Heck install Windows 8 over Windows Release Preview and watch what happens to your installed programs. MS has no clue how to do things properly based on those two facts alone.
As promised, I'm am back to confess error on the RAM etc. My "brilliant deduction" turned out to be more like the bumbling Inspector Clouseau than Sherlock Holmes. AQ, please serve me up the crow platter well done.
This breakdown iPad 4 Teardown Reveals A6X Chip With 1GB RAM, LG Display site claims
I still think 2GB would have been cool.
- Apple A6X Processor
- Hynix H2JTDG8UD2MBR 16 GB NAND Flash
- 2 x 4Gb Elpida LP DDR2 = 1 GB DRAM in two packages